Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Facebook Is Hiring To Make Linux Networking Better Than FreeBSD

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Facebook Is Hiring To Make Linux Networking Better Than FreeBSD

    Phoronix: Facebook Is Hiring To Make Linux Networking Better Than FreeBSD

    Facebook is hiring another Linux kernel engineer to join its growing kernel team. The goal for the new employee will be to make "the Linux kernel network stack to rival or exceed that of FreeBSD" and carry out other improvements to the Linux network stack...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTc1NjY

  • #2
    Gets hired to improve the Linux network stack, ends up migrating all servers to FreeBSD

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by BSDude View Post
      Gets hired to improve the Linux network stack, ends up migrating all servers to FreeBSD
      Only in your wet dreams dude!
      Haters gonna hate, hackers gonna hack, and BSD is gonna suck..

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by BSDude View Post
        Gets hired to improve the Linux network stack, ends up migrating all servers to FreeBSD
        But the point is there is a demand for Linux even though "FreeBSD's network stack better than Linux' " claim.

        Comment


        • #5
          Genuine question, what's so good about BSDs network stack (i.e. what makes it so superior to Linux)?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by kaprikawn View Post
            Genuine question, what's so good about BSDs network stack (i.e. what makes it so superior to Linux)?
            Personally, I don't know anything about FreeBSD.
            But I found an interesting post on Slashdot.

            http://bsd.slashdot.org/comments.pl?...1&cid=47615685

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by BSDude View Post
              Gets hired to improve the Linux network stack, ends up migrating all servers to FreeBSD
              Keep dreaming. Linux beat it years ago. That's why companies migrate their servers to Linux and that's why Linux server market share is MUCH higher than BSD:

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_s...n_the_Internet

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by uid313 View Post
                Personally, I don't know anything about FreeBSD.
                But I found an interesting post on Slashdot.

                http://bsd.slashdot.org/comments.pl?...1&cid=47615685
                It's a trolls post. According to netcraft Linux is much more robust and stable. It always dominates the first ten most reliable servers in their sourvey. This job offer is a joke or comes from a bsd fanboy. Why didn't they choose FreeBSD instead of Linux? The answer is simple: Linux is better.
                Last edited by Pawlerson; 08-07-2014, 09:58 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
                  It's a trolls post. According to netcraft Linux is much more robust and stable. It always dominates the first ten most reliable servers in their sourvey. This job offer is a joke or comes from a bsd fanboy. Why didn't they choose FreeBSD instead of Linux? The answer is simple: Linux is better.
                  well is true BSD can reach higher throughput using a lot less CPU cycles when certain threshold is reached in ultra fast connections with several thousand queues but that is about it, so normally you have BSD in those cases as front end and Linux behind to handle that data.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    My employer uses mostly Linux servers but BSD is used in places because of the BSD implementation of carp (for failover) has been more reliable than the Linux equivalent so far.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by BSDude View Post
                      Gets hired to improve the Linux network stack, ends up migrating all servers to FreeBSD
                      Side effect: FB would no longer need to work on btrfs because FreeBSD has great ZFS support out of the box.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Awesomeness View Post
                        Side effect: FB would no longer need to work on btrfs because FreeBSD has great ZFS support out of the box.
                        They can contribute here: http://zfsonlinux.org

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          It's true

                          FreeBSD is better on the network stack. I should know since I coded a networking library to use the best possible non-blocking mechanism on various OSes.

                          Just for a specific comparison, freeBSD has kQueue where Linux has epoll mechanism. Both are replacements for the ancient select call which is extremely inefficient when there's a huge amount of connections (see C10k problem).

                          kQueue is very smart in how it reports events happening on sockets and gives you the full list of "read" and "write" events in one go. That means one syscall/gateway per report batch in a scheduled slice.

                          epoll on the other hand can only report reads or writes in one syscall/gateway. The way to have "one" event reporting point with epoll is to epoll two epolls on top one for reads one for writes, which means it can go up to 3 syscalls. That IS 3x slower on linux, I have tested this.

                          This is just one part of the problem, I'm guessing they have other, deeper issues. I think it'd help if fanboys who know nothing of the systems stopped being so defensive.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by kaprikawn View Post
                            Genuine question, what's so good about BSDs network stack (i.e. what makes it so superior to Linux)?
                            Back in the early '90s I worked at University of California, and had a lot of hands on with FreeBSD, NetBSD and Linux. At that time, the BSDs were like well oiled machines, firing on all cylinders, and Linux was pretty rough around the edges. But I remember thinking, even at the time, that there was just the faintest hint of a musty smell around the old BSDs, and Linux, though rough in comparison, was profoundly vital, growing and pulsing with life and possibility.

                            If you compared Linux to FreeBSD at the time, Linux just didn't match up, and those comparisons are no doubt still in the back of people's minds. As they say, you only get one chance to make a first impression.

                            Since then, Linux has steadily gained features, performance and stability, taken over the data center, the super-computing world, and mobile devices. But if there are pieces of the FreeBSD network stack where they still have a better algorithm, then IMHO there's no shame in leveraging their knowledge.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Almindor View Post
                              FreeBSD is better on the network stack. I should know since I coded a networking library to use the best possible non-blocking mechanism on various OSes.

                              Just for a specific comparison, freeBSD has kQueue where Linux has epoll mechanism. Both are replacements for the ancient select call which is extremely inefficient when there's a huge amount of connections (see C10k problem).

                              kQueue is very smart in how it reports events happening on sockets and gives you the full list of "read" and "write" events in one go. That means one syscall/gateway per report batch in a scheduled slice.

                              epoll on the other hand can only report reads or writes in one syscall/gateway. The way to have "one" event reporting point with epoll is to epoll two epolls on top one for reads one for writes, which means it can go up to 3 syscalls. That IS 3x slower on linux, I have tested this.

                              This is just one part of the problem, I'm guessing they have other, deeper issues. I think it'd help if fanboys who know nothing of the systems stopped being so defensive.
                              This is the internet, man. Tribalism always trumps logic.

                              This article seems to back up your argument, though I only skimmed it: http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/~sangji...vs-kqueue.html

                              I'm a Linux fanboy, but I'll take any branch of open source software over proprietary any day. So as long as Windows or QNX or HP-UX or something else proprietary do not start winning the server wars, I'm satisfied.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X