At 12:51 AM 11/30/2006, Nick Pavlica wrote:
Did a quick default install. Results are not so interesting since one
stream livelocks the box. Basic stats at http://www.tancsa.com/blast.html
If there are some OpenSolaris wizards out there who want me to tune,
I am happy to retest...
Mike,
I'm not an OpenSolaris/Solaris expert, but was curious which build
you were testing with.
Hi,
I grabbed the latest DVD bits that were available at the time.
# uname -a
SunOS interlope 5.11 snv_52 i86pc i386 i86pc
SolarisExpress CE or B52 at the time of this writing. Of course I
patched all of these boxes before I did my testing which was mostly
centered around disk I/O performance on UFS and ZFS, and some
experimentation with Zones/Containers.
Didnt do any patches. The only thing I did was kill off X and disable
and enable ipfilter. Its quite possible there was other cruft
running that I didnt know about, but like I said, this was my first
exposure to OpenSolaris so I have no idea if there are things I
should have set.
I'm surprised that the console
locked up during your tests.
My limited experience with Solaris 10+
thus far has been positive in terms of performance and stability.
It does recover afterwards, but pretty well all other processes stop
as the CPU I guess is pegged dealing with all the interrupts.
Thinking further about my tests, it doesnt really do that great of a
job of simulating normal real world conditions. In the real world,
the packet sizes will vary and the speeds will be all over the
place. I am wondering if some of these modern nics have that in mind
with their design. But then again, this is sort of the scenario
when a firewal gets blasted by a high PPS attack :(
When I have stressed my test systems, they remained responsive and
seemed to have better performance than FC6 and Ubuntu6.10 when
copying large files across my network.
But thats pretty different then my test setup. All the OSes I tested
can do that no problem :)
Thanks for digging in with this testing, I hope you keep at it.
Yeah I inadvertently slighted the NetBSD folks by leaving them
out. So I guess I better give them a try as well.
The part that really surprises me is the drop in performance as
firewall rules are added to RELENG_6 and above. Both LINUX and
RELENG_4 seem to scale well with the number of rules added but
RELENG_6 takes a big drop.
---Mike
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
