Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DragonFlyBSD Kernel Gets Major SMP Improvements

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

  • DragonFlyBSD Kernel Gets Major SMP Improvements

    Phoronix: DragonFlyBSD Kernel Gets Major SMP Improvements

    The latest multi-threading improvements to the DragonFlyBSD kernel involve reducing SMP contention for allowing the BSD operating system to better utilize large multi-core systems...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTQ4ODU

  • #2
    Good news. This is an only BSD distribution which makes something on its own ie. HAMMER file system. It's also worth to mention its developers don't play in cheap and stupid propaganda lies like those from freebsd.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by phoronix View Post
      Phoronix: DragonFlyBSD Kernel Gets Major SMP Improvements

      The latest multi-threading improvements to the DragonFlyBSD kernel involve reducing SMP contention for allowing the BSD operating system to better utilize large multi-core systems...

      http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTQ4ODU

      Nice - now that their cleanup projects are beginning to solidify, I wonder if they'll finally meet their goal of scaling better than FreeBSD?
      (Not that I'll be moving right off ... I'm really quite fond of ZFS, and the things they've done with pkg/poudriere lately are rather useful.)

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by dnebdal View Post
        Nice - now that their cleanup projects are beginning to solidify, I wonder if they'll finally meet their goal of scaling better than FreeBSD?
        (Not that I'll be moving right off ... I'm really quite fond of ZFS, and the things they've done with pkg/poudriere lately are rather useful.)
        They could always port ZFS.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by dnebdal View Post
          Nice - now that their cleanup projects are beginning to solidify, I wonder if they'll finally meet their goal of scaling better than FreeBSD?
          (Not that I'll be moving right off ... I'm really quite fond of ZFS, and the things they've done with pkg/poudriere lately are rather useful.)
          How do you know DragonflyBSD scale worse? As far as I remember it was better than freebsd at Phoronix last time.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by tron_ston
            Look at want they are doing, they are just trying to make their OS like Linux. Why don't they just move to Linux instead make it better rather then wasting time and developing a rival knockoff of Linux and fragmenting the open source community?
            They are not tryng to make it like Linux.

            Originally posted by tron_ston
            There's nothing good about ZFS, it's old, out dated, inadequate for modern use and BTRFS has shown to beat it in everything.
            BTRFS is not even stable yet.

            Originally posted by tron_ston
            pkgng is a complete mess which shows just how pathetic FreeBSD is at implementing a simple decent package manager even when it doesn't approach the capabilities of apt-get and yum.
            I thought pkg and ports are decent package managers.
            Last edited by LightBit; 10-18-2013, 09:32 AM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by tron_ston
              Doesn't matter, Linux still scales way better then both BSDs. Also, DragonflyBSD and community may still be slightly better then FreeBSD but they are still full of crap.

              Look at want they are doing, they are just trying to make their OS like Linux. Why don't they just move to Linux instead make it better rather then wasting time and developing a rival knockoff of Linux and fragmenting the open source community?



              There's nothing good about ZFS, it's old, out dated, inadequate for modern use and BTRFS has shown to beat it in everything.

              pkgng is a complete mess which shows just how pathetic FreeBSD is at implementing a simple decent package manager even when it doesn't approach the capabilities of apt-get and yum.

              1. pkgng still does not have an official repository

              2. It's slower then all other Linux package manager

              3. If you have two different versions of a package (i.e. vim and vim-gtk) installed pkgng doesn't work reporting a package conflict and does nothing.

              4. Point no.3 is so annoying because it often happens during upgrading of packages. There be package-2.0 install needing to be replaced by package-3.0. pkgng sees this and stops giving an error saying package-3.0 conflicts package-2.0 and now you are stuck.

              poudriere is nothing more then a really pathetic way to make up for the lack of a pkgng repository. Now users have to make thier own repository (aka. compile the damn entire ports tree again and again wasting so much time).
              DragonFly BSD are not trying to copy Linux. Matt Dillon, the main developer, is more inspired by AMiGA. Furthermore, there are many reasons why people prefer to develop for Dragonfly than for Linux. I will leave the research up to you.

              ZFS is certainly getting older, but it is still leaps and bounds ahead of most filesystems used today.

              pkgng is not a mess as far as I can tell. It works just as well as any other package manager I've seen, and I would say that it definitely closely matches the capabilities of apt and yum.

              pkgng does not yet have an official repository. This is correct. You shall have to wait for one. Alternative, there a wide variety of repositories by third parties which would work just as well.

              I've not seen it to be any slower than most other package managers, personally. Are you sure?

              Your 'points' number 3 and 4 are things I've never heard of-- perhaps if you experience those you might wish to file a bug report and try to resolve the issue?

              As for poudriere, I quite like it, personally. It is not a replacement for a central package repository but it is very useful regardless. Particularly in that many of us prefer to customise and configure our packages before building.

              Comment


              • #8
                pkgng has no official repo for FreeBSD, but there has been official repos for DragonFly for quite some time now, with more than 20k pre-built binary packages avaible.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by JX8p View Post
                  ZFS is certainly getting older, but it is still leaps and bounds ahead of most filesystems used today.
                  ZFS is under active development and continues to improve upon itself. While other filesystems are still behind what ZFS was in Open Solaris, ZFS itself is well ahead of that. There is a list of notable changes/improvements maintained on the Open ZFS website:

                  http://open-zfs.org/wiki/Features

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by tron_ston
                    Why don't they just move to Linux instead make it better rather then wasting time and developing a rival knockoff Linux and fragmenting the open source community?
                    Whoops, best ask Google to stop making Android and Samsung to stop developing Tizen then. Can't have any fragmentation at all /s

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by tron_ston
                      Doesn't matter, Linux still scales way better then both BSDs. Also, DragonflyBSD and community may still be slightly better then FreeBSD but they are still full of crap.
                      It depends on the workload. Both Solaris and FreeBSD will outscale Linux at storage workloads on the Sun Fire X4540. You might be able to get close with ZFSOnLinux, but serialization by Linux's kernel virtual memory lock would probably keep its performance below other ZFS implementations until ZFSOnLinux switches its internal buffers from virtual memory to pages.

                      Originally posted by tron_ston
                      Look at want they are doing, they are just trying to make their OS like Linux. Why don't they just move to Linux instead make it better rather then wasting time and developing a rival knockoff of Linux and fragmenting the open source community?
                      Linux is a clone of the UNIX System V kernel. You should not be criticize others as developing knock-offs when you like Linux.
                      Last edited by ryao; 10-18-2013, 07:47 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Tried the daily USB image.
                        It's in the "Gee, I wish I could use this" category:
                        +starts fine (Acer Aspire One ZG5)
                        +X works in the native resolution
                        +Xfce by default
                        +has just about any program you'll need (Firefox, VLC, Thunderbird...)
                        +Has drivers for Atheros AR5xxx chips (kldload if_ath, afaict...)
                        -I couldn't get the AR5007 in my laptop working.
                        -doesn't recognize that the battery is charging
                        -doesn't autoload drivers
                        -lacks a graphical WPA/net config tool in the menus; it's RTFM and edit the configfiles.
                        Not that I _mind_ that, but it's nice to have some way of getting things going...
                        -if you want X at all, you need a 4G flash drive and 1 GB download, and you have to give it the whole flash drive.
                        -CDE hasn't been ported yet

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Ibidem View Post
                          Tried the daily USB image.
                          -CDE hasn't been ported yet
                          Here, here. It's still a benchmark you know.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by ryao View Post
                            Linux is a clone of the UNIX System V kernel. You should not be criticize others as developing knock-offs when you like Linux.
                            I thought it was inspired by MINIX?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I would love to see some benchmarks with these changes. Also promising is Hammer 2 file system; would be interesting to contrast it with ZFS and BTRFS.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X