No announcement yet.

Fedora, Debian, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, OpenSolaris Benchmarks

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by kebabbert View Post
    You claim that I FUD. But everything I claim, is backed up by relevant links and certified benchmarks and white papers in an academic way - then it is not FUD. On the other hand, YOU, have not provided any relevant backup for your claims. And you claim that I lie, but do not/can not point out my lies.
    I won't even bother replying to your other bull. You're still lying and FUDing, because I pointed you were lying and FUDing and you're saying now you backed up everything you said by "relevant links and certified benchmarks...", but you didn't backup things I pointed and which are lies and FUD. Every time you say "But everything I claim, is backed up by relevant links" is another lie. I consider you didn't provided any relevant backup for your claims and I was repeating this since some time.


    • #77
      Originally posted by kebabbert View Post
      I agree that to be able to draw a full conclusion, we need to know more details and debug the SAP system and see exactly why Linux has problems with cpu utilization on almost identical hardware.
      It's not almost identical hardware and software is different too.

      No one objects when Linux is faster ("ah, such a good and fair benchmark".
      Another lie.

      But when Linux is slower on, e.g., SAP benhcmarks, there are people questioning the SAP benchmark.
      A sane person can't say Linux scales worse basing on SAP papers you posted and this is one of the reasons you're an idiot to me.

      ("no, this can not be right, something is wrong with the benchmark")
      I see there's really something wrong with you.

      I think this is not really fair, but hey, since when has Linux supporters been fair? They compare 800 MHz SPARC to 2.4GHz Intel Core Duo and thinks that is fair. If I question that, they insist it is fair. Only one year later, they MAY admit it was not fair. But maybe not.
      This is exactly what you're doing here. You're showing two different papers with two different servers and you say Solaris scales better and you don't want to admit it's not fair. You're also accusing others exactly what you're doing.

      Linus lags behind - demand a full investigation with full debug information and dont accept this benchmark. "Something must be wrong, I refuse to accept this stupid stupid stupid SAP benchmark."
      This "stupid stupid stupid SAP benchmark" didn't benchmark Linux and Solaris, but two different servers. Phoronix benchmarks systems using their stock configurations (usually) and this is quite fair. Of course you can install newer packages, tweak some things etc. and results will be different. You will accept defaults are tested or you can cry like a baby.

      I still think Linux supporters are not fair, but that is the way life is: not fair. Nothing to do, just accept it.
      It's you who's not fair. You gave Bonwick (a SUN developer) PR talk to backup your claims, two different SAP papers which you treat like an OS benchmark etc.

      You said in one of your comments something like: Linux is known it doesn't scale well. I can say Solaris is known of being slow thus the name Slowlaris.


      • #78
        Well after a long period of time, we now have FreeBSD 8.1 RC2 with high-performance ZFS. I wonder how it competes with Fedora 13 using EXT4?