Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 17:30:59 -0500 From: Mark Shroyer <subscriber+freebsd@markshroyer.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NetBSD 5.0 looks cool Message-ID: <4B7DBFA3.7010101@markshroyer.com> In-Reply-To: <242758.48200.qm@web111302.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <b10011eb1002180039h290fc5c8q48f85bad8eb114b9@mail.gmail.com> <87vdduespd.fsf@kobe.laptop> <242758.48200.qm@web111302.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2/18/2010 10:32 AM, Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri wrote: > How about these bench vs FreeBSD?! > > http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img11.html > > http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img13.html > > http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img15.html If those numbers are characteristic of the operating system's overall performance, then that's a really impressive leap forward for NetBSD. That said, I use FreeBSD mainly on small, individual servers; as we all know, there's a lot more that goes into selecting a server OS than raw performance numbers. Stability, security features (like the ability to run Apache jailed with whatever random, potentially insecure CGI or PHP applications one must install), and ease of software installation and maintenance are important too, and for me FreeBSD excels at these things. But between these massive performance improvements, and its mature Xen compatibility, and the fact that they evicted Sendmail from the base system in favor of Postfix, NetBSD really has my attention. (In fact I'm setting up a VM right now so I can get a feel for how NetBSD + pkgsrc handles as a server.) Now if only it had jails... -- Mark Shroyer http://markshroyer.com/contact/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4B7DBFA3.7010101>