From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 29 18:20:51 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30CCC1065672 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 18:20:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from a.kuriger@liquidphlux.com) Received: from mail.liquidphlux.com (mail.liquidphlux.com [209.98.210.169]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE18F8FC21 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 18:20:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.liquidphlux.com (Postfix, from userid 80) id 562234EBFC7; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 13:02:19 -0500 (CDT) To: Dieter MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 13:02:19 -0500 From: Andrew Kuriger In-Reply-To: <200909290226.CAA28246@sopwith.solgatos.com> References: <200909290226.CAA28246@sopwith.solgatos.com> Message-ID: <689d500ec8c95542a53440b8a23ae773@mail.liquidphlux.com> X-Sender: a.kuriger@liquidphlux.com User-Agent: RoundCube Webmail/0.3-stable Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs Ubuntu - Discuss... X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 18:20:51 -0000 On Mon, 28 Sep 2009 19:26:34 PDT, Dieter wrote: > In message , > Francisco Reyes writes: >> Steven Hartland writes: >> >> > Just noticed the following posted on phoronix: >> > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=freebsd8_ubuntu910&num=1 >> > Comments? >> >> This was discussed in detail in slashdot.. starting with the fact that >> most >> likely debug switches were not turned off for FreeBSD. > > "All of the FreeBSD and Ubuntu options were left at their defaults." > > My question is why is FreeBSD's disk i/o performance so bad? > Not just in the benchmarks with debugging on, but in real world usage > where it actually matters. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" Well for one if we look at /usr/src/UPDATING "NOTE TO PEOPLE WHO THINK THAT FreeBSD 8.x IS SLOW: FreeBSD 8.x has many debugging features turned on, in both the kernel and userland. These features attempt to detect incorrect use of system primitives, and encourage loud failure through extra sanity checking and fail stop semantics. They also substantially impact system performance. If you want to do performance measurement, benchmarking, and optimization, you'll want to turn them off. This includes various WITNESS- related kernel options, INVARIANTS, malloc debugging flags in userland, and various verbose features in the kernel. Many developers choose to disable these features on build machines to maximize performance. (To disable malloc debugging, run ln -s aj /etc/malloc.conf.)" Since the article says that they left the debugging features on I think this has a bit to do with it. Obviously the testers didn't care to read the documentation, and didn't seem to care to use the same compiler which is available in ports, I believe it is safe to chuck this lame benchmark. ~Andrew -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments