On Sun, 28 May 2006 19:06:33 +0200 Matthias Kilian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Fri, May 26, 2006 at 10:37:11PM -0400, Adam wrote:
> > > PF and spamd, for example. bgpd may be a good candidate, too.
> > 
> > Those scale better on openbsd than they do on freebsd and netbsd?  Have
> > you actually tested this?
> 
> No, I neither do benchmarking nor have I equipment and a large
> enough network for doing real-world tests. But I know some people
> that actually are running campus-sized networks or similar that
> either reported good performance with OpenBSD or seriously consider
> switching from Linux or FreeBSD based solutions to OpenBSD.

I am not saying OpenBSD doesn't work, I have used it for years for lots
of stuff.  I also know that I couldn't use it for lots of stuff because
it would crash under heavy load.  I know that when some of those bugs
were finally fixed, it still couldn't handle anywhere close to what
linux could, using the same hardware.

> Oh, but comparing general performance of Linux vs. OpenBSD on a
> typical desktop/development PC, I *can* tell you that OpenBSD
> performs much better, especially when the machine does lots of IO
> in the background.

The question was about scalability.  If openbsd blows everything else
away in scalability for some task, I would really like to know what
that task is.

Adam

Reply via email to