Re: Benchmark: NetBSD 2.0 beats FreeBSD 5.3 in server performance

From: Jesper Louis Andersen (jlouis_at_mongers.org)
Date: 01/06/05

  • Next message: Steven Hartland: "Re: Benchmark: NetBSD 2.0 beats FreeBSD 5.3 in server performance" 
    Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 12:41:54 +0100
To: Bosko Milekic <bmilekic@technokratis.com>

    Quoting Bosko Milekic (bmilekic@technokratis.com):

    > Not to mention, FreeBSD5 has yet to be micro-optimized. How about some
    > scalability benchmarks on multi-CPU machines? The original post
    > (particular since it was sent to -advocacy) is FUD.

    How many CPU's do you have in mind? I would not expect FreeBSD to
    outperform NetBSD by much for a 2-CPU box with a typical server
    workload with typical programs that does not even know to take advantage
    of a ''superior'' threading model. For a computer with 4-8 CPU's the
    advantage might be much bigger, but I have not yet seen any benchmarks
    targetting computers with that number of CPUs. Partially because
    people does not yet have access to such computers, partially because
    most people doesn't care about that kind of scalability.

    But this is speculation. I would like to see perfarmonce benchmarks for
    your scenario as well.

    I disagree that the original post is entirely FUD. While the conclusion
    is subjective, fact is that at the particular mix of microbenchmarks
    shows NetBSD faster than FreeBSD. I am wondering if that is the price
    you pay on single-cpu boxes to gain speed at the SMP boxes. And if this
    is true the question becomes if fine-grained locking is worth the
    implementation time when most computers are still single-cpu (Yes, I
    know this can change rapidly with the newer CPU types). 

    -- 
jlouis
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
  • Next message: Steven Hartland: "Re: Benchmark: NetBSD 2.0 beats FreeBSD 5.3 in server performance"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Benchmark: NetBSD 2.0 beats FreeBSD 5.3 in server performance
      ... > outperform NetBSD by much for a 2-CPU box with a typical server ... > targetting computers with that number of CPUs. ... mailing lists as being an affirmative proof that NetBSD outperforms ... FreeBSD in various different setups which is, I maintain, complete ...
      (freebsd-performance)
    • Re: What version of FBSD does Yahoo run?
      ... I will repeat what I have said before - FreeBSD for my stands for a strict ... weren't you demanding an email ago that I produce benchmarks ... So I guess you recommend that anyone running a network ... Are the gains in mySQL greater that the 40% ...
      (freebsd-questions)
    • Re: FreeBSD 5.3 MySQL Performance
      ... benchmarks "look" fast but are completely unsafe. ... > he won't be a pioneer in using large MySQL databases on FreeBSD. ... drives are more expensive than those wimpy ATA drives. ...
      (freebsd-questions)
    • Re: Linus Torvalds on FreeBSDs Use of Copy-on-write
      ... benchmarks, it actually introduces extra overhead, "the thing is, ... I know that freeBSD developers have over the last few years also ... relative cost of memory-to-memory copies vs. TLB shootdowns and possible ...
      (freebsd-arch)
    • Re: The case for FreeBSD
      ... I'm aware that FreeBSD has access ... missed as well as general feedback from the user base is lacking for your current needs. ... not only patch testing and timely feedback, but also regularly published benchmarks, ... articles focusing on systems engineering with FreeBSD, ...
      (freebsd-current)