From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 16 06:55:49 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 431BE1065679 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 06:55:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@rewt.org.uk) Received: from abby.lhr1.as41113.net (abby.lhr1.as41113.net [91.208.177.20]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF3E08FC16 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 06:55:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jasmine.internethq (unknown [91.208.177.192]) by abby.lhr1.as41113.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D61A92283A for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 06:44:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [172.16.11.44] (jwh-laptop.internethq [172.16.11.44]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by jasmine.internethq (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D9B41187EA00; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 07:43:33 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <4EEAE8DF.40303@rewt.org.uk> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 06:44:47 +0000 From: Joe Holden User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Arnaud Lacombe References: <4EE1EAFE.3070408@m5p.com> <4EE2AE64.9060802@m5p.com> <4EE88343.2050302@m5p.com> <4EE933C6.4020209@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <20111215024249.GA13557@icarus.home.lan> <4EE9A2A0.80607@zedat.fu-berlin.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD Stable Mailing List , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Current FreeBSD , "O. Hartmann" , Jeremy Chadwick Subject: Re: 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: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 06:55:49 -0000 Arnaud Lacombe wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 2:32 AM, O. Hartmann > wrote: >> Just saw this shot benchmark on Phoronix dot com today: >> >> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTAyNzA >> > it might be worth highlighting that despite Oracle Linux 6.1 Server is > using a kernel + compiler almost 2 years old, it still manages to > out-perform the bleeding edge FreeBSD :-) > serenity# gcc --version gcc (GCC) 4.2.1 20070831 patched [FreeBSD] serenity# uname -r 9.0-RC3 > Now, from what I've read so far in this thread, it seems that a lot of > people are still in abnegation... > > my 0.2c, > - Arnaud > >> 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. >> >> From the compiler, I'd like say there couldn't be a drop of more than 10 >> - 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 >> > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"