FreeBSD/PC-BSD 10.2 vs. Ubuntu 15.04/15.10 Benchmarks

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • nasyt
    Senior Member
    • Oct 2014
    • 227

    #11
    Originally posted by SystemCrasher View Post
    due to lack of filesystems choice, lack of production-quality VMs & containers and awkward package management.
    Obviously, package management and VMs and containers are more important than everything else.

    Comment

    • nasyt
      Senior Member
      • Oct 2014
      • 227

      #12
      I like Linux' idea about missing documentation.

      What is missing Documentation?

      FreeBSD: missing Documentation is a bug.
      Linux: missing Documentation is a feature.

      Comment

      • name99
        Senior Member
        • Mar 2013
        • 288

        #13
        Originally posted by cjcox View Post
        Isn't BSD dead? (just trying to be the first to post it)
        BSD is actually undergoing something of a renaissance driven by (yes, I know many of you don't want to hear it) ideas from Apple.
        Jordan Hubbard did work at Apple years ago to clean up various areas of Unix that had become problematic. This includes system initialization, a common run loop scheme (ie a standard runtime for EVERY sort of "wait until something happens on this port/socket/file/queue whatever and then run this code"), a standard scheme for balancing the number of threads across apps and reusing threads (rather than continually tearing them down and recreating them), proxies for signal handlers (so that multiple libraries within a single app can ALL claim the same signal successfully, and so that there are no weird restrictions on what code can run in signal handlers), etc etc.
        You could view a common thread in all this as asking "If we HAVE the abilities that Mach ports provide, how can we use THOSE abilities rather than Unix traditions to provide the sets of services we wish to provide in a way that is more secure and/or more robust and/or with lower overhead?"

        Jordan is now working on BSD and his current agenda appears to be first to give BSD the essential equivalent of Mach ports, and then to gradually restructure BSD to make optimal use of this new capability.

        I can predict the response of the Linux contingent to these developments. Of vastly more interest would be the response of people like Theo and Matt and my guess is that at some point (when they have time, and after the BSD work has come to fruition) they will substantially agree with Jordan's reasoning and will adopt this work enthusiastically.

        Comment

        • SystemCrasher
          Senior Member
          • Jan 2015
          • 1376

          #14
          Originally posted by nasyt View Post

          Obviously, package management and VMs and containers are more important than everything else.
          You see, I've used containers for somethnig like TEN YEARS. And VMs, too. It made my life considerably easier in some regards... while BSDs do not even have it in production state. Same goes for package management. I do not live forever, so waiting 10 extra years for some tech isn't good for me. Hopefully it explains why I'm not a big fan of BSDs.

          Comment

          • nasyt
            Senior Member
            • Oct 2014
            • 227

            #15
            Originally posted by SystemCrasher View Post
            You see, I've used containers for somethnig like TEN YEARS. And VMs, too. It made my life considerably easier in some regards... while BSDs do not even have it in production state. Same goes for package management. I do not live forever, so waiting 10 extra years for some tech isn't good for me. Hopefully it explains why I'm not a big fan of BSDs.
            I'm not a big fan of BSDs eighter. But I'm also not a fan of Linux. There are many good things out there - all underutilized in favour of Linux of course - that would all give one an distinct advantage in his infrastructure. And the Linux folks are adding good features to make people ignore bad things. Like spraying around fragrance spray in order to conceal the stink.

            Comment

            • nasyt
              Senior Member
              • Oct 2014
              • 227

              #16
              Originally posted by phoronix View Post
              Phoronix: FreeBSD/PC-BSD 10.2 vs. Ubuntu 15.04/15.10 Benchmarks

              It's been a while since last running any BSD vs. Linux benchmarks, so I've started some fresh comparisons using the latest releases of various BSDs and Linux distributions. First up, as for what's completed so far, is using the FreeBSD-based PC-BSD 10.2 compared to Ubuntu 15.04 stable and the latest development release of Ubuntu 15.10.

              http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=22232
              Whats about BSD's Networking code, is this faster or slower than Linux'? We don't know because it was not measured on this benchmark. In fact, it was never measured.

              #TcpipBenchmarksPlease

              Comment

              • profoundWHALE
                Senior Member
                • Oct 2013
                • 1199

                #17
                I would like a few networking benchmarks and possibly a game? Maybe? Back in the day, FreeBSD was faster than Linux at that.

                Comment

                • DeFTeR
                  Junior Member
                  • Jul 2015
                  • 5

                  #18
                  Very much interested in some network as well as DB(MySQL/PostrgreSQL) benchmarks for FreeBSD/NetBSD and CentOS/Debian/Fedora/Ubuntu.

                  Comment

                  • TiberiusDuval
                    Phoronix Member
                    • Oct 2014
                    • 103

                    #19
                    Lack of PKG management? What then does pkgng do, if not package management? And ZFS does everything I'll need from filesystem. (On Linux side I use ext4)

                    Comment

                    • RedShift
                      Junior Member
                      • Jan 2016
                      • 4

                      #20
                      The tests that are heavy on disk I/O weren't conducted fair. ZFS was used on the BSD side, for equal comparison, the Ubuntu setup should have used BTRFS (or the BSD side, UFS should've been used).

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X