Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 21:26:53 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: seth@freebie.dp.ny.frb.org (Seth) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com, krooger@debian.org, jesus.monroy@usa.net, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [Linux vs. NT, take 2.] Message-ID: <199906292126.OAA27977@usr08.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9906291620290.63857-100000@freebie.dp.ny.frb.org> from "Seth" at Jun 29, 99 04:22:57 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Talk to Mike Smith. FreeBSD's numbers are worse than Linux's. > > Is there any validity to the discussion on -hackers that real-world > application performance doesn't corroborate the poor benchmark results > (as far as FreeBSD is concerned)? I'm less concerned that benchmarks > aren't good than I am that my application performance suffers relative to > other platforms. That particular test is a packet capture of real world traffic, played back through the actual SAMBA code that would have been invoked by the traffic, and the playback rate determining the benchmark result. So for that particular test, the answer is "no, there's no validity to the claim that the benchmark is not representative of a real world load or real world expected results". Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199906292126.OAA27977>