Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FreeBSD 8.0 vs. Ubuntu 9.10 Benchmarks

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

  • #61
    Oh well, it was an interesting discussion .

    Comment


    • #62
      it almost seems like freebsd users hate us. I mean, i dont mind freebsd.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
        it almost seems like freebsd users hate us. I mean, i dont mind freebsd.
        I personally love these threads.

        There is clearly a cycle in response to these benchmarks.
        • Shock
        • Disbelief
        • Denial
        • Anger
        • Investigation
        • Acceptance

        If I some more time, I'd come up with a snappy 5 or 7-stage acronym for the cycle and copyright it .

        Any takers to improve the acronym, SDDAIA isn't as catchy as I wold like.

        Comment


        • #64
          I've used BSD *once*. It was m0n0wall, I think you all know it, the router distribution.

          So, I'm not a BSD fanboy. In fact, I'm using Archlinux and currently compiling 2.6.31 with the BFS 240 patch.

          With that said, I think it's said that so many... less fortunate users here on Phoronix' forums spread so many lies and (what seem like) retarded comments.

          It has been said many times in this thread that this comparison/benchmark is invalid - it has also been explained why, in the most basic terms.
          Yet, users here disregard the facts, put their hands on their ears and scream "BSD sux!! Linux is faster no matter what!! lalalala".

          It's sad, really. Just my 0.02.

          Comment


          • #65
            which 'facts'?

            ubuntu rc was compared against freebsd rc and freebsd release and was faster than BOTH.

            another fact: freebsd users claim for more than a decade that freebsd is 'faster' but whenever challenged they mumble in their beards. If someone does a benchmark, linux almost always wins - by a wide margin. And ALWAYS the freebsd fanboys claim the test is 'invalid'.

            Newsflash: it is not. Just because you don't like the results does not make it invalid. The result is pretty simple:
            a RC of UBUNTU is faster than a RC of FreeBSD AND a RELEASE of Freebsd.

            About other cases of freebsd suckage:
            http://bulk.fefe.de/scalability/
            http://bulk.fefe.de/lk2006/

            yes, those are old. Surprisingly FreeBSD was not able to come up with good, fair benchmarks in the mean time. Or isn't it a surprise at all?

            There are reasons why Linux is the more popular server OS. Despite FreeBSDs claims and headstart. And the reason is not fanboism. The reason is:
            linux is so much better at it.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by energyman View Post
              which 'facts'?

              ubuntu rc was compared against freebsd rc and freebsd release and was faster than BOTH.
              Ubuntu didn't have debug stuff on. BSD did. Therefore, the test is not valid in comparing BSD and Linux performance.

              If you want to compare FreeBSD 8 RC performance to Ubuntu 9.10 Alpha 6, then sure, this benchmark is correct. But it's utterly useless nonetheless.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by fackamato View Post
                Ubuntu didn't have debug stuff on. BSD did. Therefore, the test is not valid in comparing BSD and Linux performance.

                If you want to compare FreeBSD 8 RC performance to Ubuntu 9.10 Alpha 6, then sure, this benchmark is correct. But it's utterly useless nonetheless.
                Ubuntu also has some debug enabled. Btw. someone should paste Mtippett posts next time
                Last edited by kraftman; 09-29-2009, 01:44 PM.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by fackamato View Post
                  Ubuntu didn't have debug stuff on. BSD did. Therefore, the test is not valid in comparing BSD and Linux performance.

                  If you want to compare FreeBSD 8 RC performance to Ubuntu 9.10 Alpha 6, then sure, this benchmark is correct. But it's utterly useless nonetheless.
                  wrong and wrong.

                  Ubuntu has debug turned on

                  Ubuntu was also compared to a RELEASE. So the comparism is valid. Even if you take 8 RC out of the picture Ubuntu still kicked 7.2 RELEASE

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by fackamato
                    Ubuntu didn't have debug stuff on. BSD did. Therefore, the test is not valid in comparing BSD and Linux performance.

                    If you want to compare FreeBSD 8 RC performance to Ubuntu 9.10 Alpha 6, then sure, this benchmark is correct. But it's utterly useless nonetheless.
                    According to clau:
                    "So, there were a bunch of messages (including from myself) about this, without actually checking it. I just installed FreeBSD 8.0RC1 in Qemu, and AFAICT the debugging options aren't enabled."
                    Last edited by Apopas; 09-29-2009, 01:48 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Can't verify the debug options myself.

                      What I heard is that some debug things were turned on for the BSD kernel and not the Ubuntu kernel. If that's wrong, so BSD and Ubuntu had similar debug options turned on, then I suppose the benchmark is okay from that perspective.

                      To be honest, all these comments that look like they're coming from 2-year olds is that destroys this thread.

                      Anyway. Can't wait for the huge OS/distro comparison.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by energyman View Post
                        wrong and wrong.

                        Ubuntu has debug turned on

                        Ubuntu was also compared to a RELEASE. So the comparism is valid. Even if you take 8 RC out of the picture Ubuntu still kicked 7.2 RELEASE
                        differing GCC versions make any kind of "ubuntu > freebsd" conclusion from this test impossible anyway.

                        that wasn't the point of the test though, which was comparing "out-of-the-box" experience.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by mtippett View Post
                          It is the maintainers who are making the tuning decisions, consequently the benchmark approach of "out of the box" is still valid and still valuable.
                          I appreciate your point (it is FreeBSD's fault they benchmark slow by leaving debugging defaults on), but I guess I don't know what to do about it. To me, it is very well documented how to build your own system kernel, how to compile the system with optimize options, how to build the system with newer GCC.

                          It may be that you feel those actions are not "in your face" enough that you found them?

                          The FreeBSD handbook goes through these steps, but for your convenience I will restate a few here:

                          1) Build a new kernel, the GENERIC kenrel isn't intended to be used in production systems. A new kernel will remove/disable debugging, improve security (unused kernel features), require less memory (unneeded drivers), and more.

                          2) Rebuild world with your CPU type to take advantage of optimization based on CPU type.

                          3) Rebuild ports/world with GCC 4.3 or 4.4 to take advantage of SSE3/SSE4 CPU features prohibited due to restrictive licensing imposed by GCC. GCC starting with 4.2.2 is under GPL3, which is an incompatible license with BSD license. So they can not legally ship GCC 4.2.2 or up (which is why you see 7.2 and 8.0 using GCC 4.2.1 compiler.)

                          Each of those actions (#1 and #2 are assumed all users will perform, #3 is optional) will significantly improve performance. If you have trouble performing these options, I can help. PM me.

                          Originally posted by clau View Post
                          So, there were a bunch of messages (including from myself) about this, without actually checking it. I just installed FreeBSD 8.0RC1 in Qemu, and AFAICT the debugging options aren't enabled.
                          Therefore, I don't expect big changes in the RELEASE, unless the benchmarking will be done by using a newer GCC version (8.0 has version 4.2.1, although a newer version can be used from ports).
                          8.0 RC1 (and 7.2) ship with the kernel compiled with debugging:
                          /usr/src/sys/i386/conf% grep DEBU GENERIC
                          makeoptions DEBUG=-g # Build kernel with gdb(1) debug symbols
                          options IEEE80211_DEBUG # enable debug msgs
                          Last edited by risner; 09-29-2009, 02:11 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by risner View Post
                            Rebuild ports/world with GCC 4.3 or 4.4 to take advantage of SSE3/SSE4 CPU features prohibited due to restrictive licensing imposed by GCC. GCC starting with 4.2.2 is under GPL3, which is an incompatible license with BSD license. So they can not legally ship GCC 4.2.2 or up (which is why you see 7.2 and 8.0 using GCC 4.2.1 compiler.)
                            I didn't do any research on this, so sorry if this question is stupid, but how is GPLv3 anymore incompatible with the BSD-license than GPLv2? The GPL has always been more restrictive and thus BSD-incompatible, but that didn't stop them from shipping GPLed software before now, has it?

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by Zhick View Post
                              I didn't do any research on this, so sorry if this question is stupid, but how is GPLv3 anymore incompatible with the BSD-license than GPLv2? The GPL has always been more restrictive and thus BSD-incompatible, but that didn't stop them from shipping GPLed software before now, has it?
                              I am not a licensing expert so I can only comment on the situation as I remember it when the decision to stop at GCC 4.2.1 was made by the FreeBSD developers. At the time it was said to be a legal reason and not a "political" or emotional reason.

                              What I do know is that the BSD license is significantly more permissive than the GPL license, particularly the GPLv3 license. There are a number of licenses incompatible with GPLv3 including Apache 1-2.0, Mozilla, Original BSD, XFree86 1.1 and GPLv3 (if not for the usual "code can be upgraded to future GPL licenses" line in most GPLv2 versions.)

                              Did a little googling, I think this is the problem:
                              http://www.fsf.org/licensing/license...ption-faq.html

                              Where they now (with GCC 4.2.2) consider OUTPUT of the GCC compiler GPLv3 licensed material. That would prevent someone from using GCC 4.2.2 and up to compile anything and release the compiled application without source code for the whole system (because Target Code is now forced to be GPLv3 code) being released.
                              Last edited by risner; 09-29-2009, 02:41 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Of course you are aware that 8.0 doesn't have the debugging symbols out of the kernel even, let alone libc, malloc, etc. yet. Why not set up a more real world benchmark like a MySQL or Postgres ACID test, or a tpc benchmark. Zipping files will generate a mostly sequential read and/or write, not really where filesystems tend to fall down. Did the compile tests use concurrency?
                                Nice graphs tho.
                                If you wanted to talk to some seasoned BSD admins about setting up benchmarks, try me in ##freebsd on freenode.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X