From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 15 07:32:57 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FF881065672; Thu, 15 Dec 2011 07:32:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de) Received: from outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de (outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de [130.133.4.66]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F31158FC16; Thu, 15 Dec 2011 07:32:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de ([130.133.4.69]) by outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.69) with esmtp (envelope-from ) id <1Rb5oE-0005nB-UC>; Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:32:55 +0100 Received: from e178002216.adsl.alicedsl.de ([85.178.2.216] helo=thor.walstatt.dyndns.org) by inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.69) with esmtpsa (envelope-from ) id <1Rb5oE-0007kp-PT>; Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:32:54 +0100 Message-ID: <4EE9A2A0.80607@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:32:48 +0100 From: "O. Hartmann" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111109 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jeremy Chadwick , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Current FreeBSD References: <4EE1EAFE.3070408@m5p.com> <4EE2AE64.9060802@m5p.com> <4EE88343.2050302@m5p.com> <4EE933C6.4020209@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <20111215024249.GA13557@icarus.home.lan> In-Reply-To: <20111215024249.GA13557@icarus.home.lan> X-Enigmail-Version: undefined Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig3AC99262226F5AAF3DFA6856" X-Originating-IP: 85.178.2.216 Cc: FreeBSD Stable Mailing List Subject: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 07:32:57 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig3AC99262226F5AAF3DFA6856 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Just saw this shot benchmark on Phoronix dot com today: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=3Dnews_item&px=3DMTAyNzA It may be worth to discuss the sad performance of FBSD in some parts of the benchmark. A difference of a factor 10 or 100 is simply far beyond disapointing, it is more than inacceptable and by just reading those benchmarks, I'd like to drop thinking of using FreeBSD even as a backend server in scientific and business environments. In detail, some of the SciMark benches look disappointing. The overall image can't help over the fact that in C-Ray FreeBSD is better performing. =46rom the compiler, I'd like say there couldn't be a drop of more than 1= 0 - 15% in performance - but not 10 or 100 times. I'm just thinking about the discussion of SCHED_ULE and all the saur spots we discussed when I stumbled over the test. Regards, Oliver --------------enig3AC99262226F5AAF3DFA6856 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJO6aKmAAoJEOgBcD7A/5N8dvYH/1pfvvuy5BJWEEf5LTNhAaIv awHwt5jJ3WJA7zmwtnbGSw2qkRFC8E9D5+jOQ0rissGrSYH4qBakSpfnnJiRTtOm iYzAwnQYXt2STTKuNaz4rcG3bnX8i1SpbHre6Kj1p4cij/sQJXty9CMdVIR3dwYD pLfxSk9yFYrWi2Xpy9zqxdMKC1g/FITIuScwQeXtD3tfQlrh+LPvDK21c+OhukeZ cgVuzNw2274pTPlLNaJpAGkcMw1kPJ3U1cEGaI4nwGLFKvduQp2z13mRHLXATh/a lmVvV/0AIJ6UVLGpwOaBcaCXFxWJ+ez9aDlYM18z2dlfOvLnYcxND/u5GoHHyJg= =3PDg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig3AC99262226F5AAF3DFA6856--