Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

systemd 246-RC1 Released

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

  • Space Heater
    replied
    Originally posted by tuxd3v View Post

    You are talking more about hardware support( kernel drivers ), for specific accelerators.. in that Area of-course Linux is on front..
    I am talking generically dsb stack always was superior..
    No, BBR, RACK, andsoftware pacing are not device drivers.

    Originally posted by tuxd3v View Post
    Afaik, Facebook was using bsd in the frontend, and Linux in the backend
    Where did you get this information from, I have seen nothing that indicates Facebook uses FreeBSD.

    Originally posted by tuxd3v View Post
    Its a well know thing that the Linux network stack was based on bsd, the windows was also based on bsd, this are true.
    Telling me it's well-known isn't providing evidence.

    For the record, I agree that FreeBSD is a good OS and has a great networking stack, but I don't think it's really that much better than Linux's.

    Leave a comment:


  • tuxd3v
    replied
    Originally posted by Space Heater View Post
    Facebook uses Linux in their datacenters. If you are referring to Facebook's acquisition of whatsapp, they've migrated from FreeBSD to Linux to match Facebooks ecosystem. Given this changeover likely happened several years ago, it's safe to say the switch wasn't disastrous and this conflicts with your claim that Linux has a non-competitive networking stack.

    (...)

    Looking at recent FreeBSD developer summits, specifically their transport group, a lot of what they discuss is working towards parity with Linux's networking stack. For example adding RACK, BBR, NUMA awareness, and pacing. So really, where is the hard evidence that FreeBSD is far and away superior when it comes to networking?
    You are talking more about hardware support( kernel drivers ), for specific accelerators.. in that Area of-course Linux is on front..
    I am talking generically dsb stack always was superior..

    Afaik, Facebook was using bsd in the frontend, and Linux in the backend..its also knows that Facebook has been contributing to try to improve network stack quality in linux, maybe they find a day, and check and they are on par already, I don't know the current status..

    Originally posted by Space Heater View Post
    Please provide evidence that the Linux network stack is a copy of the "bsd stack" and further show why it is "far from good".
    Its a well know thing that the Linux network stack was based on bsd, the windows was also based on bsd, this are true.
    That doesn't mean that Linux copied the code from BSD, it means that the linux implementation was not so good.

    Facebook come giving some help to Linux to help to improve Linux network Stack..
    This information is in the public domain and easily checked.. Michael reported here some times about Facebook aid..

    A implementation based in something is different than copy the exact code of bsd.. but I still believe it could be there yet some bits.. because there are things that are faster in a way, and if you implement then in another way, it runs slower..

    Leave a comment:


  • Space Heater
    replied
    Originally posted by tuxd3v View Post
    I don't agree with you, netflix, and Facebook also don't agree with you..
    Its true that Linux network stack has made some progress but is far from good..
    Facebook uses Linux in their datacenters. If you are referring to Facebook's acquisition of whatsapp, they've migrated from FreeBSD to Linux to match Facebooks ecosystem. Given this changeover likely happened several years ago, it's safe to say the switch wasn't disastrous and this conflicts with your claim that Linux has a non-competitive networking stack.

    Originally posted by tuxd3v View Post
    They copied bsd stack( like Linux ), but the implementation was not brilliant..
    Please provide evidence that the Linux network stack is a copy of the "bsd stack" and further show why it is "far from good".

    Looking at recent FreeBSD developer summits, specifically their transport group, a lot of what they discuss is working towards parity with Linux's networking stack. For example adding RACK, BBR, NUMA awareness, and pacing. So really, where is the hard evidence that FreeBSD is far and away superior when it comes to networking?

    Leave a comment:


  • tuxd3v
    replied
    Originally posted by Volta View Post
    Linux network stack eats BSD for breakfast as usual:
    I don't agree with you, netflix, and Facebook also don't agree with you..
    Its true that Linux network stack has made some progress but is far from good..

    Originally posted by Volta View Post
    Windows xp networking is god awful, so it's rather weak recommendation.
    [/QUOTE]
    They copied bsd stack( like Linux ), but the implementation was not brilliant..
    One thing they have done right, XP was the best Desktop ever, blazing fast, surprisingly comfortable to use, and so on..

    Now compare it, with the "house of horror's" that is Linux for the desktop, with gnome, etc
    XP had at the time, what Linux doesn't have even today, and will not have even tomorrow, on the desktop..

    Each year we are far away from having good desktop's Environments..

    Leave a comment:


  • k1e0x
    replied
    Originally posted by Volta View Post

    You rather meant inferior.
    All this tells me Volta is you haven't looked at them. Its pretty common thing in the Linux camp really.. declare superiority.. not know what else exists.. don't even bother looking.

    Blacklistd is amazing, it modifies the system daemons so they can report login attempts directly to the firewall. Linux's equivalent? fail2ban, something that parses log files.. sometimes it gets it right, sometimes not. blacklistd does not parse logs, as parsing data from logs (from the internet) in general is a really bad way to go about it. Blacklistd is the solution, port it.

    PF is a terrific firewall. The language is clear and simplistic, especially compared to NetFilter. You can collect raw packets off it's pflog interface using tcpdump or wireshark. It can do queuing, traffic normalization and reassembly and layer 7 filtering. It also includes on the fly adjustable dynamic tables. No wonder it was ported to everything except Linux (including macOS, where it is the default firewall.) After working with iptables and netfilter, PF is what got me to love BSD, it is way easier, more powerful and more flexible. You don't need a frontend to control it, or a script to build it's rules.

    This stuff is permissively licensed, free for all to use.
    Last edited by k1e0x; 07-13-2020, 05:33 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Volta
    replied
    Originally posted by tuxd3v View Post
    Linux desktop Environments??

    Were do you saw that?
    Desktop Environment run in a plethora of systems, not only on linux..
    Yes, but only Linux users work on them and only Linux users report bugs. There are some meaningless exceptions like 0.01%.

    And now you just Imagine Linux without the BSD network stack... were we would be today without it and other things?
    Even Microsoft used it on Windows XP, and I am not sure if they don't continue to use it..? right..
    Linux network stack eats BSD for breakfast as usual:

    https://news.netcraft.com/archives/2...june-2020.html

    Windows xp networking is god awful, so it's rather weak recommendation.
    Last edited by Volta; 07-13-2020, 12:01 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • tuxd3v
    replied
    Originally posted by Volta View Post
    Imagine FreeBSD without borrowed ZFS, DTrace, Linux graphic stack, Linux desktop environments etc. Oh and Netflix doesn't exist without Linux.
    Linux desktop Environments??

    Were do you saw that?
    Desktop Environment run in a plethora of systems, not only on linux..

    Afaik they scale at least until 64 cores, I don't know if more..

    And now you just Imagine Linux without the BSD network stack... were we would be today without it and other things?
    Even Microsoft used it on Windows XP, and I am not sure if they don't continue to use it..?

    right..

    Leave a comment:


  • Volta
    replied
    Originally posted by tuxd3v View Post
    Maybe that is why NetFlix uses freeBSD then..?
    Maybe because they're more familiar with it? Or perhaps its slave license serves them better? If that was the case Google, Facebook, Youtube and dozens of others would be running FreeBSD. There's only Netflix, so your argument is against it. Did you ever see FreeBSD on 256 core+ server? Except in wet dreams? It's a legacy, toy OS with 'borrowed' features. Its development is nearly none. Imagine FreeBSD without borrowed ZFS, DTrace, Linux graphic stack, Linux desktop environments etc. Oh and Netflix doesn't exist without Linux.
    Last edited by Volta; 07-11-2020, 08:41 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • tuxd3v
    replied
    Originally posted by Volta View Post
    No, FreeBSD just doesn't scale.
    Maybe that is why NetFlix uses freeBSD then..?

    Leave a comment:


  • Volta
    replied
    Originally posted by tuxd3v View Post
    Well that's bad for SAP itself..
    But if they need a hand( a paid hand of course, no free lunch's to SAP.. ),
    Maybe they can find someone to port the installer, and create the necessary daemons..
    No, FreeBSD just doesn't scale.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X