Anatomy of Perfomance tests

2012-06-29 Thread Siju George
Hi, Can some body comment on these tests? http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=articleitem=debian_wheezybsd_freezenum=1 Are these tests skewed in some way to make Linux look better? Thanks --Siju ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list

Re: Anatomy of Perfomance tests

2012-06-29 Thread Wojciech Puchar
Most probably all filesystems were used with defaults. MAYBE softupdates, but not even sure for this. Compare this to linux which is async-like. Comparing with UFS+async would be more fair. Still - FreeBSD default MAXPHYS in param.h is far too low. i change it to 2048*1024 (default is

Re: Anatomy of Perfomance tests

2012-06-29 Thread Fred Morcos
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote: Most probably all filesystems were used with defaults. MAYBE softupdates, but not even sure for this. Compare this to linux which is async-like. Comparing with UFS+async would be more fair. Still -

Re: Anatomy of Perfomance tests

2012-06-29 Thread Wojciech Puchar
when properly configured FreeBSD is quite good. if that company: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTExNDM chose FreeBSD in spite of hype-overloaded linux it must be a reason. As well as it seems they know what they are doing, storage configuration is IMGO an example how

Re: Anatomy of Perfomance tests

2012-06-29 Thread Julien Cigar
On 06/29/2012 11:00, Fred Morcos wrote: On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote: Most probably all filesystems were used with defaults. MAYBE softupdates, but not even sure for this. Compare this to linux which is async-like. Comparing with

Re: Anatomy of Perfomance tests

2012-06-29 Thread Walter Hurry
On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 11:40:37 +0200, Julien Cigar wrote: On 06/29/2012 11:00, Fred Morcos wrote: On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote: Most probably all filesystems were used with defaults. MAYBE softupdates, but not even sure for this.

Re: Anatomy of Perfomance tests

2012-06-29 Thread Jakub Lach
-of-Perfomance-tests-tp5722932p5722964.html Sent from the freebsd-questions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd

Re: Anatomy of Perfomance tests

2012-06-29 Thread Wojciech Puchar
what i would like to see too is how these systems compare on such test: - run lots of heavy disk I/O tests, many different in the same time, including ones doing many writes to different places. - turn off power while doing this, by unplugging from wall plug. - compare amount of loss and

Re: Anatomy of Perfomance tests

2012-06-29 Thread Fred Morcos
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote: what i would like to see too is how these systems compare on such test: - run lots of heavy disk I/O tests, many different in the same time, including ones doing many writes to different places. - turn off

Re: Anatomy of Perfomance tests

2012-06-29 Thread Wojciech Puchar
That said, I think that the Linux kernel performs better simply due to wider adoption (larger developer base, wider set of use-cases, etc) and thus a higher chance of getting performance improvements. Note that stability matters too. of course - this is what i pointed out at first. the

Re: Anatomy of Perfomance tests

2012-06-29 Thread Wojciech Puchar
___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org It would be very interesting to see the results of stress-testing