On 7 Mar 2017, at 18:12, Miroslav Lachman wrote:
Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote on 2017/03/07 08:10:
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 02:14:44AM +0100, Miroslav Lachman wrote:
There is some comparison of DragonflyBSD, FreeBSD and two versions
of
Linux in specific network benchmark - HTTP/1.1 short lived
Maybe someone should retest and see where the problem.
It doesn't help in saying the test sucks or is done wrong.
On 9 March 2017 at 20:26, O. Hartmann wrote:
> Am Tue, 7 Mar 2017 02:14:44 +0100
> Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> schrieb:
>
> > There is some comparison of DragonflyBSD, Free
Am Tue, 7 Mar 2017 02:14:44 +0100
Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> schrieb:
> There is some comparison of DragonflyBSD, FreeBSD and two versions of
> Linux in specific network benchmark - HTTP/1.1 short lived connections.
> FreeBSD is the worst in this test.
>
> https://www.dragonflydigest.co
Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote on 2017/03/07 08:10:
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 02:14:44AM +0100, Miroslav Lachman wrote:
There is some comparison of DragonflyBSD, FreeBSD and two versions of
Linux in specific network benchmark - HTTP/1.1 short lived connections.
FreeBSD is the worst in this test.
https
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 02:14:44AM +0100, Miroslav Lachman wrote:
> There is some comparison of DragonflyBSD, FreeBSD and two versions of
> Linux in specific network benchmark - HTTP/1.1 short lived connections.
> FreeBSD is the worst in this test.
>
> https://www.dragonflydigest.com/2017/03/06/
There is some comparison of DragonflyBSD, FreeBSD and two versions of
Linux in specific network benchmark - HTTP/1.1 short lived connections.
FreeBSD is the worst in this test.
https://www.dragonflydigest.com/2017/03/06/19425.html
https://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/~sephe/perfcomp/1K.png
https://lea
