Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 12:51:23 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Mike Jakubik <mikej@rogers.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Performance of 4.x vs 5.x (Re: Lifetime of FreeBSD branches) Message-ID: <20050523195123.GA13810@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <3248.172.16.0.199.1116876092.squirrel@172.16.0.1> References: <3248.172.16.0.199.1116876092.squirrel@172.16.0.1>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--ew6BAiZeqk4r7MaW Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 03:21:32PM -0400, Mike Jakubik wrote: > Could someone point me to a resource that outlines the expected supported > lifetime of all the branches? Can't find anything concrete on the webpage. >=20 > I'm developing a product, which i hope will run on FreeBSD. However the > rapid development of 5, and now 6 arriving out in a few months has me > worried if FreeBSD will be the right choice short and long term. I have > even considered using 4.11 for its stability and speed on single processor > systems, but I'm worried that some ports/hw will not be supported. The common wisdom has been that FreeBSD 4.11 is faster than 5.4 on single processor systems. Imagine my surprise when I went and actually benchmarked this on the package build machines, and found that 5.4 outperforms 4.11 by at least 10% when performing identical workloads on identical UP hardware :-) Stay tuned for more details... Kris --ew6BAiZeqk4r7MaW Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFCkjQ7Wry0BWjoQKURAs7nAJ9o4rP/bQv1uW3nkB/wJb9i5adiZwCgwn2/ MwnOnEcO6YJuW2vB2P2vc+o= =cyzj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ew6BAiZeqk4r7MaW--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050523195123.GA13810>