I can say that these "micro" benchmarks are not "so much" useful . When such comparisons are made based on "abstract" views , they DO NOT SHOW very much utility .
Over previous years I am always stressing that proper comparisons would be based on a "specified" workload : Which distributions is more suitable for that "specified" work load ? Testing / benchmarking should be performed with respect to such criteria , for example , continuously "a day work necessary for a profession" , "a web server for a 'specified' task" , "a NFS server working for a 'specified' application" . Then comparisons of parts causing significant differences may generate useful improvement possibilities . When we see *BSD distributions as a single group , it is obvious that everyone has its own priorities to realize . The same is true also for Linux distributions . Without taking such differences into consideration , reaching some conclusions about them would only be a waste of time . With my best regards , Mehmet Erol Sanliturk On Sat, Dec 11, 2021 at 1:40 PM Sami Halabi <sodyn...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > I see these claims over and over. > So I must ask. > Is there any tunibg guide(s) to make the default not conservative in a > regrding to several use cases like using as web server? How to Utilize gpu > maybe? > I know there are few network (aka routing / forwarding) guides.. but maybe > instead of that superior feeling "oh they are linuxish and knoe shit" maybe > better supply the tuning needed to get better results? > And I'm not talking to get an engineer to analyze the tests case.. > Maybe the linux defaults fit better for most use cases rather than being > conservative?? > > Just to be clear I almost not used linux and always freebsd for simplicity > usage.. but I must say it makes me wonder > > Sami > > בתאריך שבת, 11 בדצמ׳ 2021, 11:52, מאת beepc.ch <xpe...@beepc.ch>: > > > > I am surprised to see that the BSD cluster today has much worse > > performance > > > than Linux. > > > What do you think of this? > > > > "Default" FreeBSD install setting are quite conservative. > > The Linux common distros are high tuned, those benchmark is in my > > opinion comparison of apples and oranges. > > > > Comparing "default" FreeBSD install with "default" Slackware install > > would be more interesting, because Slackware builds are at most vanilla. > > > > >
