Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 13:47:20 +0400 From: Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org> To: Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server Message-ID: <1704813846.20111219134720@serebryakov.spb.ru> In-Reply-To: <4EEF0025.6040205@infracaninophile.co.uk> References: <4EE1EAFE.3070408@m5p.com> <CAJ-FndDniGH8QoT=kUxOQ%2BzdVhWF0Z0NKLU0PGS-Gt=BK6noWw@mail.gmail.com> <4EE2AE64.9060802@m5p.com> <4EE88343.2050302@m5p.com> <CAFHbX1%2B5PttyZuNnYot8emTn_AWkABdJCvnpo5rcRxVXj0ypJA@mail.gmail.com> <4EE933C6.4020209@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <CAPjTQNEJDE17TLH-mDrG_-_Qa9R5N3mSeXSYYWtqz_DFidzYQw@mail.gmail.com> <20111215024249.GA13557@icarus.home.lan> <4EE9A2A0.80607@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <CAJ-VmomWnAvsVPcK0mfFECvFw_FKcja1m3NE9ue=TOkF%2Bx14Xg@mail.gmail.com> <CANY-Wm8jbtr3tiwdGQMDx8SVZKEBspGwTV7Q0wziYWsV%2Bf3BSQ@mail.gmail.com> <6140271.20111219122721@serebryakov.spb.ru> <4EEF0025.6040205@infracaninophile.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello, Matthew. You wrote 19 =E4=E5=EA=E0=E1=F0=FF 2011 =E3., 13:13:09: >> (1) Make FreeBSD looks good on benchmarks by "fixing" FreeBSD >>=20 >> (2) Make FreeBSD looks good on benchmarks by "fixing" Phoronix >> (communication with them, convincing, that they benchamrks are unfare >> / meaningless, ets) > (2a) Ignore Phoronix, other than explaining concisely why their numbers > are complete balderdash. Publish our own benchmarks, done with care and > rigour and using well defined, repeatable, peer reviewed methodology > that anyone can repeat. Aggressively publicise these results. Ok, it is The Way too, I agree. But in modern world, unfortunately (for me, and I'm sure, for many FreeBSD hackers), keywords are "Aggressive= ly publicise" but not "done with care and rigour and using well defined, repeatable, peer reviewed methodology that anyone can repeat" >> (3) Lose [potential] userbase. > Indeed. Unfortunately "performance" is /the/ deciding factor in many OS > choices, never mind that it is an impossibly complex subject to > generalise to a few management-friendly numbers in a one-size-fits-all > abstract way. Having only one source of published numbers suggesting > that "OS Foo is better" *even if those numbers are completely bogus* > will have a disproportionate effect. Yep. --=20 // Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1704813846.20111219134720>