Meaning that it's pre release and the defaults are set so that users can constructively report bugs.
On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 04:50 Paul Pathiakis <pathia...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Matt, > > Meaning? How does -O0 optimization and INVARIANTS affect this? > > Personally, I find everything on Phoronix "out-of-the-box" FreeBSD and > optimized Linux. *shrug* Apples? Meet Oranges. I make my money as a > contractor supporting RH/CentOS, but it's always funny to give people the > heads up on who uses FreeBSD as their starting point and to let them know > the home network runs on FreeBSD. > > When people think Linux (which they believe is the only OSS "Operating > System" out there) I have to explain kernel and user space and then > explain FreeBSD is both and then show them the numerous CVE exploits for > that year.... 150+ versus ~15. Faster is not always better, especially > when you're circumventing standards to get that speed. (I remember the IIS > vs Apache wars.... Turned out that IIS was not doing things properly and > circumvented a lot of exploit protections for that speed.) > > Building an OS that does everything well OOB, FreeBSD can do that. > Optimize for application specific.... It usually wins, places or shows. > > Sadly, I didn't realize that FreeNAS was using OpenZFS vs the FreeBSD > ZFS. Here's my question.... Why? It was my understanding that SUN made it > OSS and there are conflicts with the CDDL and GPL. It seems silly to lose > performance for no reason. > > As for phoronix, I read it for a laugh. It's funny how so many "Linux is > everything/rules" people I meet who just use it as a shield and have never > evaluated the kernels of both and the surrounding userland. The FreeBSD > project is tight, goes through a proper QA and release cycle and out pops, > even a x.0 release, a fully useful new OS version with everything neat, > tidy, functional and fast. (So, if FreeBSD can do this, why are all the > crazies that are producing software screaming AGILE and quick releases > which still has not solved the problem of crap code?) > > Ooops, bit of a rant.... sorry all, > > Paul > > > > On Thursday, March 21, 2019, 12:37:23 PM EDT, Matthew Macy < > mm...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > These were run with ZoF compiled with -O0 and INVARIANTS. Take what you > read with a grain of salt. > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 09:28 Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> wrote: > > > There is a benchmark comparing ZFS in FreeBSD 12 with ZFS in TrueOS > > based on ZFSonFreeBSD 9https://zfsonfreebsd.github.io/ZoF/0 > > > > FreeBSD ZFS vs. TrueOS ZoF vs. DragonFlyBSD HAMMER2 vs. ZFS On Linux > > Benchmarks > > https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=bsd-initial-zof#=1 > <https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=bsd-initial-zof&num=1> > > > > I am interested if there will be enough testing before replacing the > > official FreeBSD code base with ZoF. ZFS in FreeBSD 12 is much faster so > > I am afraid if FreeBSD based on ZoF will be as fast as our current > > implementation of ZFS. > > > > Kind regards > > Miroslav Lachman > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd...@freebsd.org mailing list > > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > To unsubscribe, send any mail to " > freebsd-performance-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > _______________________________________________ freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
