Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Debian GNU/kFreeBSD Benchmarks With Its New Kernel

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

  • Debian GNU/kFreeBSD Benchmarks With Its New Kernel

    Phoronix: Debian GNU/kFreeBSD Benchmarks With Its New Kernel

    As was reported recently, the Debian GNU/kFreeBSD port now has limited support for handling ZFS file-systems and its stock kernel has been upgraded against that of FreeBSD 8.1. Due to the upgraded kernel we ran a quick set of benchmarks to see how the performance of Debian GNU/kFreeBSD to that of Debian Linux.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=15352

  • #2
    Sometimes I just...
    Using letter 'k' for something not related to kde?
    Why I just... the nerve.

    Comment


    • #3
      @klavko: the knerve .

      Comment


      • #4
        Why mention it now supports ZFS and then do the bench on UFS?

        Comment


        • #5
          Is there any test more useless than that SQLLite insert benchmark? Why does michael still include it in every one of these OS comparisons?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
            Is there any test more useless than that SQLLite insert benchmark? Why does michael still include it in every one of these OS comparisons?
            Yep, Apache benchmark done on a single machine.

            Comment


            • #7
              OMG, apache and sqlite are extremely important benchmarks - every desktop (including netbook and mobile phone) user keeps running them all the time. If your machine can't do more than a million requests or inserts per second, you are doom3d and have kregressed. </sarcasm>

              Comment


              • #8
                Rolls eyes

                Look some pretty kgraphs that tell you knothing knew or kinteresting

                PTS is not a substitute for a good article

                Graphs are nothing without analysis

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by hdas View Post
                  OMG, apache and sqlite are extremely important benchmarks - every desktop (including netbook and mobile phone) user keeps running them all the time. If your machine can't do more than a million requests or inserts per second, you are doom3d and have kregressed. </sarcasm>
                  Except many desktop *nix apps use SQLite internally, and a speedup of that means a faster program as a whole (Firefox, anyone?).
                  Try again.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by hdas View Post
                    OMG, apache and sqlite are extremely important benchmarks - every desktop (including netbook and mobile phone) user keeps running them all the time. If your machine can't do more than a million requests or inserts per second, you are doom3d and have kregressed. </sarcasm>
                    Well, to be fair, sqlite is a part of many user-level applications, such as firefox.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by hdas View Post
                      OMG, apache and sqlite are extremely important benchmarks - every desktop (including netbook and mobile phone) user keeps running them all the time. If your machine can't do more than a million requests or inserts per second, you are doom3d and have kregressed. </sarcasm>
                      Win!

                      (obligatory rant about stupid 10 char limit and 1' edit window)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        UFS defers fsync() or ?
                        I don't see how the difference could be explained otherwise...

                        ...and after 5min googling:

                        This less important data loss case is the one which most BSD's, including
                        FreeBSD and DragonFly, use for UFS write()+fsync(). Under UFS a
                        fsync() does not issue a media flush, it simply issues the I/O
                        and leaves the data sitting the drive cache.

                        source: http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/mailarc.../msg00005.html


                        Would be nice if phoronix made this quick research and put that as comments

                        Cause "blah is 12% faster than bleh", thanks, i can read the graphic, you can spare the extra keystrokes if you're going to say nothing

                        Conclusion: ext4 is faster, UFS has a broken implementation.

                        Finally, SQLite by default fsync() each transaction which is slow, but applications can just disable that, Firefox probably does it in many places.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by FireBurn View Post
                          Rolls eyes

                          Look some pretty kgraphs that tell you knothing knew or kinteresting

                          PTS is not a substitute for a good article

                          Graphs are nothing without analysis
                          Stop this, please! Think about Gnome users for the gmoment.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                            Stop this, please! Think about Gnome users for the gmoment.
                            Stop being such a gNewSense

                            Oh wait... that one's taken already

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by hdas View Post
                              OMG, apache and sqlite are extremely important benchmarks - every desktop (including netbook and mobile phone) user keeps running them all the time. If your machine can't do more than a million requests or inserts per second, you are doom3d and have kregressed. </sarcasm>

                              Thats odd, normally those are the tests I would care about, when comparing a server OS. ray tracing? cdraw? who cares again?

                              mysql performance, apache, postgres, memcache, php.

                              Those are benchmark comparisons that would actully matter.

                              side note, people still use KDE? really??!?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X