Re: FreeBSD bind performance in FreeBSD 7

On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 15:44 +0000, Chris wrote:
On 29/02/2008, Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

A weakness of freebsd is its fussyness over hardware in particular
network cards, time and time again I see posts here telling people to
go out buying expensive intel pro 1000 cards just so they can use the
operating system properly when I think its reasonable to expect
mainstream hardware to work, eg. realtek is mainstream and common as a
onboard nic but the support in freebsd is poor and only serving
datacentres to shy away from freebsd. If the same hardware performs
better in linux then the hardware isnt to blame for worser performance
in fbsd.

Chris

Not to come down too hard on you, but the reason why Pro/1000 chipsets
are reasonably pricey, and uncommon to find as an integrated NIC, except
on server boards or intel own brand mobos, is that it is decent
hardware, and hence costs real money to use. Consumer NICs like Realtek,
Via Rhine and (imo) Marvell are cheap tat that 'just about' works, until
you put it under heavy stress. I have encountered a series of Marvell
based chips on my personal home computers that work about as well as a
slap around the face. Also, even from the 'good' manufacturers, like
broadcom and intel, you have 'consumer' parts, which are reasonably
cheap, like bge(4) supported parts, and 'professional' parts, like
bce(4) parts. One should work fine under moderate load, one should work
fine under heavy load. One will cost $4, one will cost $100.

I'm not saying the drivers are bug-free, but if you want performance and
reliability, you get an em(4) or another professional chipset. Only a
few months ago at work, we had to order around 75 Pro/1000s as we had
had enough of crashes from our bce(4) based integrated NICs on our Dell
2950s. Fortunately for our wallet, we managed to fix the issues in the
driver/hardware before our supplier could source that many - thanks
David Christensen!

Personally, I wouldn't put something in a data-centre with only a vr(4)
or re(4), regardless of OS.

Tom

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Is FreeBSD ready for desktop (Mozilla Flash)
    ... A number of hardware vendors ... > happen to be using a hardware/software combination blessed by Macromedia. ... >> layer for running the Linux version of the plugin exists. ... copies of FreeBSD running on i386 than on any of the other hardware ...
    (comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc)
  • RE: Anthonys drive issues.Re: ssh password delay
    ... The dmesg you sent indicated that the 2 disks were negotiating at ... > possible cause in the universe before blaming it on FreeBSD. ... to take the risk of it being hardware, ... believe is that it's a bug in the FreeBSD driver. ...
    (freebsd-questions)
  • Re: Why are so many people using 4.x?
    ... that's the modern, supported version of FreeBSD. ... Good reasons to recommend 6.X would be "bug FOO is fixed", "hardware FOO ... The only reason I dont use 4.x on new servers is because it has ...
    (freebsd-questions)
  • Re: Quality of FreeBSD
    ... And wouldn't mind to wait longer for real production quality ... on the hardware you know ... and FreeBSD users to do some of the testing. ... This change will help shake out software bugs relating to ...
    (freebsd-stable)
  • Re: ad10: WARNING - READ_DMA UDMA ICRC error (retrying request) LBA=11441599
    ... >>that if I send hardware I want it back when you're done, ... I have two which reliably fail if you put TWO disks on them in a gmirror ... BROKEN by FreeBSD and likely to cause people trouble - including irrevocable ... the machine as the errors cause irrevocable data corruption. ...
    (freebsd-stable)