Originally posted by XorEaxEax
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
DragonFlyBSD Improves Performance Against Linux
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by kraftman View PostOnly two posts and a big fail. You linked to unreleased version. It will be nice to see some newer Linux distro rather than old SL. Btw. I always wondered why it'sFreeBSD pushed so hard rather than DragonFlyBSD. The later is not only faster, has great community, but it's also much more innovative. In contrary freebsd community are just envy fanboys and trolls.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by XorEaxEax View PostI someone who regularly benchmarks clang/llvm vs GCC I can say I've not seen any results (atleast not as recent as this year, before that my memory may fail me) where clang/llvm beats GCC where I use -O3
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by kraftman View PostOnly two posts and a big fail. You linked to unreleased version. It will be nice to see some newer Linux distro rather than old SL. Btw. I always wondered why it'sFreeBSD pushed so hard rather than DragonFlyBSD. The later is not only faster, has great community, but it's also much more innovative. In contrary freebsd community are just envy fanboys and trolls.
You criticize FreeBSD for having a fanboy comunity, but you always sound like a fanboy yourself.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by enjolras View PostYes you're right. Linux rox, and has no scalability issue, it's well known. And postgresql scales easily on latest linux kernels. Oh wait ! http://http://lwn.net/Articles/518329/
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by dfcat View PostAlso - performance tests indicate that clang (which FreeBSD will be switching to in 10.x) - is superior to gcc
in some performance tests, but slower in others - so in other words, they are extermely competitive:
Typically my tests results in 5-20% better performance with GCC versus clang/llvm, and when I've tried the GCC 4.8 versus LLVM 3.2 snapshots GCC has actually increased the performance gap (that said, snapshots are anything but conclusive). It should be noted that my benchmarks are all on x86_64, I have no idea of how x86 or for example ARM architectures compare.
On another note I find Dragonfly most interesting from a technical standpoint, keep up the good work!
Leave a comment:
-
[QUOTE=dfcat;290858]"
Originally posted by staalmannen View PostI am curious to know... would a DragonFly vkernel be able to run in user land of another OS? It is considered similar to UML but I wonder if it also could be used similarly to coLinux.
"
The vkernel requires some host-side support - specifically ability to create 'vmspaces' which are separate virtual memory maps,
and also a some minor hooks to interface to hardware / host side resources. Doable, but alot of work. Someone interested in knowing
this level of detail would be better of giving DF hardware assisted virtualization so you could run DF and virtualize the 'other' os where
needed
UML iirc also required same.
Probably the best bet right now to run dragonfly on another OS is virtualization e.g. via KVM / QEMU / VirtualBox.
I am personally, other than on several native dragonfly machines, running df on VirtualBox/Linux, with some devs using KVM.
Personally I just find chroots/jails in directories so much more convenient than typical virtualization and disk images and I think it would be really cool to be able to boot a BSD system directly on top of a Linux kernel (for all that pesky hardware that may not want to work otherwise)
Just another question - how does the vkernel compare to NetBSD RUMP? It can be run on different OSes (although I have failed building it on my Linux system) but on the other hand, it does not support running applications but rather provides various kernel features like file systems etc.
Leave a comment:
-
So DragonFlyBSD is very interesting and definitely not a waste of time...
Leave a comment:
-
Nice to see dragonfly bsd doing well, I have been watching it for years.
Leave a comment:
-
"
[QUOTE=staalmannen;290857]I am curious to know... would a DragonFly vkernel be able to run in user land of another OS? It is considered similar to UML but I wonder if it also could be used similarly to coLinux.
"
The vkernel requires some host-side support - specifically ability to create 'vmspaces' which are separate virtual memory maps,
and also a some minor hooks to interface to hardware / host side resources. Doable, but alot of work. Someone interested in knowing
this level of detail would be better of giving DF hardware assisted virtualization so you could run DF and virtualize the 'other' os where
needed
UML iirc also required same.
Probably the best bet right now to run dragonfly on another OS is virtualization e.g. via KVM / QEMU / VirtualBox.
I am personally, other than on several native dragonfly machines, running df on VirtualBox/Linux, with some devs using KVM.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: