Date: Fri, 1 May 2020 08:06:53 -0500 From: Valeri Galtsev <galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu> To: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de>, Matthias Gamsjager <mgamsjager@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD-speedometer? Message-ID: <d1c543e1-7257-8fee-2e13-47b1f52a39d5@kicp.uchicago.edu> In-Reply-To: <20200501125126.4cb4076b.freebsd@edvax.de> References: <FBFC422E-71A7-4AB4-9AD8-C4D3FB5E7CBE@kukulies.org> <CA%2BD9QhtqhdPxGBHzmYPTfri_ZvqAE9UaXQ9S5jNu5gdGwhNogA@mail.gmail.com> <20200501125126.4cb4076b.freebsd@edvax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 5/1/20 5:51 AM, Polytropon wrote: > On Fri, 1 May 2020 11:21:56 +0200, Matthias Gamsjager wrote: >> We have binary package so you don't have to compile your self. >> Of course it is a choice to compile everything but why would you want to do >> that on a small machine? > > Why? Especially because! :-) > > In ye olden times, you often used source-based installation > methods to tweak the amount of what gets installed (memory > footprint), and you dealt with cimpile-time options to get > faster software - faster than what the default configuration > allowed. For example, system tools could be omitted, or the > kernel could be configured in a way to only contain the > stuff needed for a particular system. It was also useful > for ports where you needed to deviate from the default > options, or where you were forced (!) to use source-based > installs due to licensing restrictions. > > For those who wish to track -STABE or -HEAD, source-based > installations are mandatory. Maybe someone wants to check > if a specific patch works as intended - the whole system > or just one of its components can be built and installed. > This currently is impossible with binary packages. > > While I personally enjoy using binary packages, they are > not an answer to every scenario, because there simply is > no "one size fits all egg-laying wool-milk-sow". > > Machines equipped with slower disks and less memory will > of course need more time to build something. This is why > several users keep their machine running at night where > it can compile happily. On a 150 MHz Pentium with 64 MB > RAM, building a kernel required a few hours, and the whole > system needed 24 hours to build. With today's hardware, > compile times are faster. And especially for building ports, > some people use their own build servers (real or VM) for > this task. > > > >> If you really want to see how fast it could go. Spin up a machine on AWS >> with the memory and CPUs you would compare it to. > > Comparing bare metal to virtual metal is like cheating > in statistics - choose your test subjects in a specific > way to get any result you want. :-) > Agree with the sentimet. That aside, Unixbench, maybe? Valeri > > -- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?d1c543e1-7257-8fee-2e13-47b1f52a39d5>