Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 22:17:38 -0800 From: Peter Losher <Peter_Losher@isc.org> To: Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com> Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD bind performance in FreeBSD 7 Message-ID: <47CCE982.4060201@isc.org> In-Reply-To: <BMEDLGAENEKCJFGODFOCIEHDCFAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> References: <BMEDLGAENEKCJFGODFOCIEHDCFAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig8118FBA68A78A9B7DF75DE34 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > My beef with the DNS tests was that ISC ran out and bought > the hardware FIRST, -then- they started testing. This is > directly contrary to every bit of advice ever given in > the computer industry for the last 50 years - you select > the software FIRST, -then- you buy the hardware that runs it. > In short, it said far more about the incompetence of the > testers than the shortcomings of the software. This is ridiculous. ISC is one of the most fervent pro-FreeBSD=20 companies out there (basing most of our services on the OS, and=20 contributing to the FreeBSD community including the busiest CVSup & FTP=20 servers and have FreeBSD committers on staff) I will not stand back and = watch folks on a public mailing list call us incompetent individuals=20 with a anti-FreeBSD bias. First off the final report was published last Friday at: http://www.isc.org/pubs/tn/index.pl?tn=3Disc-tn-2008-1.html (the server this is served from runs FreeBSD) I was not one of the direct testers (we had a couple PhD's handling=20 that, who I know both use FreeBSD on their personal systems), but as one = of the folks who supported them in their work, I can tell you that the=20 stats we gave the FreeBSD folks were from a test sponsored by the US=20 National Science Foundation. We were mandated to use branded HW and we=20 tested several models from HP, Sun, even Iron Systems (whitebox) before=20 deciding on the HP's. The mechanism we used are all documented in the=20 paper We were also asked to test DNS performance on several OS's. The short version was 'take a standard commercial off the shelf' server=20 and see how BIND performs (esp. with DNSSEC) on it. We weren't asked to = get hardware that was perfect for Brand X OS; that wasn't part of the rem= it. (We actually use the exact same HP HW for a secondary service where we=20 host a couple of thousand zones using BIND including 30+ TLD zones. Oh=20 and it runs FreeBSD) Yes we found FreeBSD performed poorly in our initial tests. and I talked = to several folks (including rwatson and kris) about the issue. Kris had = already been working on improving performance with MySQL and PgSQL and=20 was interested in doing the same with BIND. Kris went off and hacked=20 away and right before EuroBSDcon last September asked us to re-run the=20 tests (on the same HW) using a 7.0-CURRENT snapshot, and the end results = are shown with a 33,000 query increase over 6.2-RELEASE, bring FreeBSD=20 just behind the Linux distros we tested. I know rwatson and kris have=20 continually worked on the relevent network stack issues that cover BIND, = and additional performance gains have been found since then, and working = on this issue has been a true partnership between the FreeBSD developers = and ISC. BIND isn't perfect, we admit that, we have been constantly improving=20 it's multi-CPU performance and BIND 9.4 and 9.5 are continuing in that=20 effort. We have several members of our dev team who use FreeBSD as=20 their developent platform, including a FreeBSD committer. So Ted, stop spouting this "ISC is spewing anti-FreeBSD bias" crap, it=20 flatly isn't true... Oh, and this email is coming to you via several of ISC FreeBSD MX=20 servers which resolve the freebsd.org name via caching DNS servers=20 running FreeBSD, to freebsd.org's MX server over a IPv6 tunnel supplied=20 by ISC to the FreeBSD project to help FreeBSD eat their own IPv6 dog food= =2E.. Yeah, ISC just hates FreeBSD... <rolls eyes> Best Wishes - Peter --=20 Peter_Losher@isc.org | ISC | OpenPGP 0xE8048D08 | "The bits must flow" --------------enig8118FBA68A78A9B7DF75DE34 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAkfM6YcACgkQPtVx9OgEjQgzCwCffMOkdPDsWzJWMf+2KoWIYNJQ 7vMAoJ2QJbDS1XvJAGE5SlqbmXExbbPs =67TN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig8118FBA68A78A9B7DF75DE34--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47CCE982.4060201>