From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 5 13:26:55 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F039F106564A for ; Fri, 5 Dec 2008 13:26:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net) Received: from mail.rachie.is-a-geek.net (rachie.is-a-geek.net [66.230.99.27]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE0B38FC14 for ; Fri, 5 Dec 2008 13:26:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net) Received: from localhost (mail.rachie.is-a-geek.net [192.168.2.101]) by mail.rachie.is-a-geek.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74732AFBC02; Fri, 5 Dec 2008 04:26:54 -0900 (AKST) From: Mel To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 14:26:50 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <0016e64ca7d690e38f045d45227d@google.com> <20081205130950.W1635@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20081205075818.0dac4e82@scorpio> In-Reply-To: <20081205075818.0dac4e82@scorpio> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-6" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200812051426.51597.fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net> Cc: Subject: Re: Performance benchmarks pitting FreeBSD against Windows X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 13:26:56 -0000 On Friday 05 December 2008 13:58:18 Jerry wrote: > On Fri, 5 Dec 2008 13:11:22 +0100 (CET) > > Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >> tools like bonnie++, blogbench and postmark under cygwin and the > >> results are abysmal. It might be due to cygwin, and it might not. > >> I've used > > > >rather not. all cygwin do is wrapping calls like read, lseek, open, > >write, close to windoze calls. > > > >> Windows Enterprise Server 2003. > >> > >> You'll probably not find any difference in computational (numeric) > >> tasks > > > >unless microsoft is intentionally slowing down all programs or some of > >them to "show" adventage of their programs. > > > >no i'm not joking. it's not just possible, i'm fairly certain they do > >it. > > Slightly paranoid aren't we? It reminds me of an article I read several > years ago in which the author claimed that all "Virus" and > "Malware/Trojans" were being written by Linux users in an attempt to > discredit Microsoft and then start charging for the use of their > software in a fashion consistent with Microsoft. He went on to claim > that 'open-sore' authors would reap windfall profits. Of course, like > you, he offered no concrete evidence, just idle speculation. > > In any case, due to the multitude of flavors of *.nix and Windows > machines, in addition to the thousands of possible configurations, > systems, etc., getting a truly meaningful comparison would be a > monumental undertaking. In any event, it would be obsolete before you > ever finished it. Well, one can find stories like this of course: http://www.postgis.org/documentation/casestudies/globexplorer/ But I'm sure one can find some of the contrary. It does show the value of the benchmark: Is it economically viable to use configuration X vs Y, and performance is only one factor of the descision. -- Mel Problem with today's modular software: they start with the modules and never get to the software part.