On 04/23/2014 01:14 PM, Robert Edmonds wrote:
Doug Barton wrote:
What's your goal? If your research shows that FreeBSD is a better platform
for BIND, why is the answer not "Then use that?"
Except the graph doesn't show that FreeBSD is a clearly better platform
for BIND. According to the graph, RHEL doesn't drop any queries at all
up until 180 Kq/s, at which point FreeBSD is dropping ~5000 q/s.
Yeah, I find that result highly suspect. There are a few other problems
with the whole discussion, which is why I asked the OP what his goals
are. If RHEL really is performing that well, and the OP needs to use
RHEL for other reasons, then he has the answer.
If the OP thinks that he's going to be getting more than 180k qps on a
regular basis he has more difficult things to consider. For one, FreeBSD
7 is more than a year past EOL at this point, so even if the RHEL qps
numbers are right (which is highly suspect) if he really wants to
compare FreeBSD as a platform he should be using 9 at least.
... and to Jared's point, I agree that there are serious problems with
FreeBSD, I left the project some time ago in part because I don't agree
with the direction that they've been going. But the underlying
technology is still sound for the most part, and if it works for a given
use case it's worth considering.
Doug
_______________________________________________
dns-operations mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations
dns-jobs mailing list
https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-jobs
