What happened with DragonflyBSD? I thought that it was supposed to have the best performance of the BSD's?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Linux Distributions vs. BSDs With netperf & iperf3 Network Performance
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by bug77 View PostDebian finishing behind bloated Ubuntu in some tests... Tsk, tsk...
We're talking ~10 vs. over 250 MB here.
Ubuntu is not much more bloated, and it doesn't matter in this test anyway. It ships more up-to-date software however, which is probably the main reason why there are differences.Last edited by xnor; 07 December 2016, 01:53 PM.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
what can we learn from that?
is it even possible to make fedora 5 times faster? Or is it simply a choice that was made to sacrifice network for something else (while that wouldnt answer clear linux's performance.. and the question why they use these flags, while all others dont...) is there any effect for the desktop or laptop user? longer battery life due to more efficiency? faste downloading pages? smaller pings? what do these numbers mean? and can you not take the code from bsd and use it in linux? whats so different? the drivers? architecture? scheduler?
Comment
-
Originally posted by aht0 View Postrofl... and I sorta remember pal666, Pawlerson, SystemCrasher and such preaching some months a go in other BSD-related threads how ***BSD networking stack is way inferior to one of Linux in every conceivable way...
Originally posted by thomasj View PostWhat happened with DragonflyBSD? I thought that it was supposed to have the best performance of the BSD's?
Originally posted by jakubo View Postand can you not take the code from bsd and use it in linux? whats so different? the drivers? architecture? scheduler?
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by brauliobo View Postand this explains why netflix prefered freebsd instead of linux!
Comment
-
Originally posted by wikinevick View Post
And for advanced filesystems its also true, so true.
Comment
Comment