Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 24 Jun 1999 09:58:01 -0500
From:      Karl Denninger <karl@Denninger.Net>
To:        Mark Newton <newton@internode.com.au>
Cc:        green@unixhelp.org, drosih@rpi.edu, grog@lemis.com, mike@smith.net.au, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Microsoft performance (was: ...)
Message-ID:  <19990624095801.A7559@Denninger.Net>
In-Reply-To: <199906240353.NAA42270@gizmo.internode.com.au>; from Mark Newton on Thu, Jun 24, 1999 at 01:23:19PM %2B0930
References:  <19990623223038.A6422@Denninger.Net> <199906240353.NAA42270@gizmo.internode.com.au>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jun 24, 1999 at 01:23:19PM +0930, Mark Newton wrote:
> Karl Denninger wrote:
> 
>  > I've found FreeBSD to outperform NT-anything in any task you throw at the
>  > machine from web service to Samba for file and print service for PCs
>  > running Windows.
>  
> Granted.  Perhaps we're seeing an artifact of NT's developers focussing
> on optimizing their system for good benchmark performance rather than
> good real-world performance.
> 
> 'twill be interesting to see the offical report to find out where the
> various strengths and weaknesses really are.
> 
>    -  mark

Yes.

One place where we *ARE* weak is N-way (more than 2-way) SMP systems.  I'm
not at all sure why this happens, but I suspect that a big part of it is
concurrency issues within the kernel and filesystem.

BUT - for most REAL applications that configuration is a lose.  For example,
for a big web server I'd prefer 4 boxes and 4 IP addresses (round-robin) 
than one big box with a 4-way SMP system.  Why?  Because I get both better 
performance that way AND redundancy - if one box fails, I still have 
three more, all of which are working.  If one box fails in a 4-way 
SMP configuration I have nothing at all.

Now there ARE monolithic applications that don't take well to that kind of
scaling - big DBMS servers, for example.  But DBMS servers are typically
I/O bound anyway, not CPU bound (there are exceptions, yes, but the general
rule is that they are RAM and disk bound).

I had an NT machine that ran file and print service for my office (before
I sold the company).  I replaced it with SAMBA on the same hardware.  

Performance more than doubled, and the ONLY thing that I changed was the
operating system.

That's but one real-world example out of many.

--
-- 
Karl Denninger (karl@denninger.net)  Web: fathers.denninger.net
I ain't even *authorized* to speak for anyone other than myself, so give
up now on trying to associate my words with any particular organization.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990624095801.A7559>