Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 17:06:17 -0500 (EST) From: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net> To: dag-erli@ifi.uio.no (Dag-Erling Coidan Smørgrav) Cc: mark@vmunix.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD shines..[Fwd: Re: semaphore speed] Message-ID: <199711052206.RAA08809@dyson.iquest.net> In-Reply-To: <xzpbtzz2ico.fsf@hrotti.ifi.uio.no> from =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag=2DErling_Coidan_Sm=F8rgrav?= at "Nov 5, 97 09:31:19 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dag-Erling Coidan Smørgrav said: > > [long discussion about benchmark results in Linux/FreeBSD deleted] > > [Tons of boring and meaningless benchmark results deleted] > > Has it occurred to any of you that your benchmark results are > irrelevant unless you run the Linux and FreeBSD benchmark on the > *exact* same machine? Only then can we start comparing figures. Even > then, you have to have a comparable degree of customization in each OS > to be able to draw any conclusions; it doesn't make sense to compare a > production FreeBSD installation with a custom kernel and a vanilla > RedHat installation with a generic kernel. > Most of the discussion is associated with the differences in perf between FreeBSD kernels. Frankly, I don't think that the FreeBSD-current and RH results show that much difference to even be concerned about. Microbenchmarks aren't that valuable for real world performance comparisons anyway. Since kernel developers on the mailing list have been a party to the discussions, I don't see a problem. I don't agree with gloating about the numbers, but they are odd. -- John dyson@freebsd.org jdyson@nc.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199711052206.RAA08809>