Linux 6.8 Network Optimizations Can Boost TCP Performance For Many Concurrent Connections By ~40%

[Volta]

Here's another great benchmark from 2003. This time it's file system one:

http://bulk.fefe.de/scalable-networking.pdf

it debunks another FreeBSD crowd myths about FreeBSD having better file system or being more stable. Summing up:

So which OS is the best one? I recommend Linux 2.6. Linux scales O(1) in all benchmarks. FreeBSD 5.1 is a close second. It is O(1) in all benchmarks except mmap.

From a stability point of view, Linux and NetBSD worked stable all the time, FreeBSD 5.1-RELEASE panicked under load (that went away with 5.1-CURRENT

[sophisticles]

Wow.

As i have said Linux use seems to be a religion with some people and much like the adherents of any organized religion, they do 2 things, they spew nonsense that is demonstrably false and they ignore any evidence that can prove they are wrong.

Then they finish up by insulting those they fail to convert.

[mdedetrich]

Nope, it was malloc.

Nope it was malloc plus another bunch of things which you are ignoring. Thats why I posted those slides, its not just malloc and it never was. If you know anything about networking you would immediately realize how retarded that statement is.

It seems we have another one who ignores reality. As was already shown FreeBSD sucks in comparison to Linux in networking.

Nope, synthetic benchmarks don't really compare to actual reality of companies using FreeBSD for some of the largest production networking systems. You can make a synthetic benchmark to prove anything you want

You need to get your head out of your a** and realize that FreeBSD is even today, specifically chosen because of its superiority in networking. Its not even just the performance, it has much better diagnostic tools right out of the box .

[mdedetrich]

Also regarding Netflix, do remember that they are serving like 20% of the worlds internet traffic at this point so they are no joke. They have managed to recently push 709 gb/s of TLS encrypted traffic from a single FreeBSD host (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30061718).

Like I am sorry to break it to you, but 99% of people using Linux are no way near Netflix scale at least when it comes to pushing network.

[smitty3268]

Also regarding Netflix, do remember that they are serving like 20% of the worlds internet traffic at this point so they are no joke. They have managed to recently push 709 gb/s of TLS encrypted traffic from a single FreeBSD host (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30061718).

Like I am sorry to break it to you, but 99% of people using Linux are no way near Netflix scale at least when it comes to pushing network.

I think Netflix's use of FreeBSD has more to do with the license than with performance. Unless you have good comparisons between what Google is doing with Linux for Youtube vs the Netflix/BSD results.

The fact that two major sources of internet traffic have chosen different solutions to me means that both are adequate enough at handling traffic that other factors have come into play. And of course, in both cases I wouldn't be surprised if Netflix and Google have made some custom changes to the OS stack in order to optimize things for their needs, which haven't been released publicly. That makes it harder to switch platforms if you've historically used one or the other, and somehow I suspect Netflix probably does more of that than Google. But if you have information otherwise, by all means please share it.

[mdedetrich]

I think Netflix's use of FreeBSD has more to do with the license than with performance. Unless you have good comparisons between what Google is doing with Linux for Youtube vs the Netflix/BSD results.

Its both, they stated this numerous times.

The fact that two major sources of internet traffic have chosen different solutions to me means that both are adequate enough at handling traffic that other factors have come into play. And of course, in both cases I wouldn't be surprised if Netflix and Google have made some custom changes to the OS stack in order to optimize things for their needs, which haven't been released publicly. That makes it harder to switch platforms if you've historically used one or the other, and somehow I suspect Netflix probably does more of that than Google. But if you have information otherwise, by all means please share it.

If you read one of the links I sent earlier, NetFlix upstreams all improvements they make its just slightly delayed (for obvious reasons, they test it internally first). For example their recent NUMA changes which is letting them push 709 gb/s on a single AMD epyc machine is not upstreamed yet, but it will be eventually

[logical]

Translation, you don't have hard numbers.

As I have said, Linux use is a religion, and like all religions, the adherents get angry when you ask them to back up their claims with actual facts.

LOL, I have no religion about Linux use. If it didn't do what I needed I'd drop it. So far, for my uses, it has always gotten the job done. I'm sorry you have a burr up your rear about Linux, but that's your problem. I've used many different OSs in my career. All of them have had good and bad points. None were perfect.

[logical]

Also regarding Netflix, do remember that they are serving like 20% of the worlds internet traffic at this point so they are no joke. They have managed to recently push 709 gb/s of TLS encrypted traffic from a single FreeBSD host (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30061718).

Like I am sorry to break it to you, but 99% of people using Linux are no way near Netflix scale at least when it comes to pushing network.

One thing you must keep in mind when using such examples, and it applies to both FreeBSD and Linux, is are those companies using software/hardware that is accessible to you? If not, then the results are meaningless to you.

[mdedetrich]

One thing you must keep in mind when using such examples, and it applies to both FreeBSD and Linux, is are those companies using software/hardware that is accessible to you? If not, then the results are meaningless to you.

This was on a standard server machine i.e. AMD Rome, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30071930

And actually thats the thing, saying that other companies like Facebook who also haven a non trivial sized network deployments are doing fine in Linux isn't an argument in ofitself because a company like Meta can just throw money/resources at the problem i.e. they can just deploy more machines.

The reason why Netflix went with FreeBSD a decade ago was the highest performance network stack on commodity hardware since at the time they were pretty much a startup. They were literally using off the shelf standard xeon Intel servers for their CDN (after all their CDN boxes where physically placed at ISP edge nodes), not some massive datacenter and in this case when it comes to both performance of the network stack and most importantly diagnostic tools FreeBSD is still the king. FreeBSD having good diagnostic tools is just a result of unlike Linux, FreeBSD comes with a consisten kernel + userland so it provides a consistent and out of the box experience.

Also FYI, when it comes to serving encrypted TLS network traffic, I can't see any evidence of a Linux machine coming close to that on the same machine (i.e. dual socket AMD rome).

[coder]

Netflix is the type of business where their servers will get hammered with lots of traffic and they absolutely need reliable, fast performance, I do think it's significant that they chose BSD over any other OS for the content delivery system.

LOL, you didn't even check your own sources. Not only do they fail to cite "reliability" as a reason for using FreeBSD, they actually use bleeding edge code and cite bugs & stability as downsides of doing so.

From the PDF in your first link:

Objections to Running “Development” Code:
● It isn’t stable
● Why should you pay to find the bugs others will find while testing head?
● Aren’t there more security bugs?
● No one runs development branches
● Pay monthly “cost” to do merges
● You get new bugs each month

The second link basically reiterates this.

Further, the PS3, PS4, and PS5 use a BSD based OS:

Quite likely for commercial reasons (i.e. not having to release their patches). You know, the whole thing about Linux and GPL...

I can definitely say it's not for reliability, which is what you changed the subject to, in case you forgot. My PS3 crashed quite a lot, often requiring a hard power-cycle but sometimes rebooting on its own.

When cash is on the line that is when you find out what someone actually believes.

Okay, so if you look at all the big businesses using Linux (including other streamers, like Amazon Prime Video & Youtube), that's quite an endorsement.