From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Apr 14 13:39:56 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id NAA13170 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 13:39:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zen.nash.org (nash.pr.mcs.net [204.95.47.72]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA13144 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 13:39:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from alex@localhost) by zen.nash.org (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA04761; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 15:39:52 -0500 Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 15:39:52 -0500 Message-Id: <199604142039.PAA04761@zen.nash.org> From: Alex Nash To: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Unices are created equal, but... Reply-to: nash@mcs.com Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk [ posted to hackers only ] I ran some tests on a 486-66 ASUS S3PG with an NCR53c810 and 16MB of RAM, pitting Linux 1.3.83 against the FreeBSD 2.2 SNAP CD. Since I didn't do all the work necessary to perform an accurate comparison (the compilers were different for example), I'll skip the specific Byte UNIX Benchmark numbers. However, I did note a few interesting things: As Terry noted, the file copy test improved dramatically when FreeBSD was run in async mode. The resulting performance was within 2% of Linux. The execl throughput test was a complete massacre, with Linux more than an order of magnitude faster. Does anyone familiar with the internals of exec know why? I also ran iozone using a 50MB file with 4096 byte records. Terry, I think your idea of a FreeBSD upgrade for Linux may be coming true... FreeBSD on UFS: 2770803 bytes/second for writing the file 3908495 bytes/second for reading the file Linux on ext2fs: 3220442 bytes/second for writing the file 1950476 bytes/second for reading the file FreeBSD on ext2fs: 2768517 bytes/second for writing the file 3265638 bytes/second for reading the file Naturally, Linux on UFS resulted in 0 bytes/second :) Alex