___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
It would be very interesting to see the results of stress-testing
sy
That said, I think that the Linux kernel performs better simply due to
wider adoption (larger developer base, wider set of use-cases, etc)
and thus a higher chance of getting performance improvements.
Note that stability matters too.
of course - this is what i pointed out at first.
the second
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Wojciech Puchar
wrote:
> what i would like to see too is how these systems compare on such test:
>
> - run lots of heavy disk I/O tests, many different in the same time,
> including ones doing many writes to different places.
>
> - turn off power while doing this,
what i would like to see too is how these systems compare on such test:
- run lots of heavy disk I/O tests, many different in the same time,
including ones doing many writes to different places.
- turn off power while doing this, by unplugging from wall plug.
- compare amount of loss and dest
At least he should have used one or
at very least identical systems, not 3
different, albeit similar.
And I do not care If it would change
results or not, comparing different
systems invalidates benchmarks period.
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/Anatomy-of-
On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 11:40:37 +0200, Julien Cigar wrote:
> On 06/29/2012 11:00, Fred Morcos wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Wojciech Puchar
>> wrote:
>>> Most probably all filesystems were used with defaults.
>>>
>>> MAYBE softupdates, but not even sure for this. Compare this to linux
On 06/29/2012 11:00, Fred Morcos wrote:
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Wojciech Puchar
wrote:
Most probably all filesystems were used with defaults.
MAYBE softupdates, but not even sure for this. Compare this to linux which
is async-like. Comparing with UFS+async would be more fair.
Still
when properly configured FreeBSD is quite good.
if that company:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTExNDM
chose FreeBSD in spite of hype-overloaded linux it must be a reason.
As well as it seems they know what they are doing, storage configuration
is IMGO an example how suc
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Wojciech Puchar
wrote:
> Most probably all filesystems were used with defaults.
>
> MAYBE softupdates, but not even sure for this. Compare this to linux which
> is async-like. Comparing with UFS+async would be more fair.
>
> Still - FreeBSD default MAXPHYS in para
Most probably all filesystems were used with defaults.
MAYBE softupdates, but not even sure for this. Compare this to linux which
is async-like. Comparing with UFS+async would be more fair.
Still - FreeBSD default MAXPHYS in param.h is far too low. i change it to
2048*1024 (default is 128*102
10 matches
Mail list logo
