>> On Fri, 15 May 1998 19:01:08 -0400 (EDT), William T Wilson
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
WTW> On 16 May 1998, Peter Mutsaers wrote:
>> No, but you'd better use FreeBSD for such a task. While Linux
>> may be nicer for a personal workstation, as a serious server
>> FreeBSD offers more performance and stability.
WTW> This is no longer true. Hasn't been true for two years.
WTW> Both FreeBSD and Linux are excellent in terms of stability
WTW> and performance, and either will outperform Solaris, NT, or
WTW> most anything else on comparable hardware. Linux also equals
WTW> or outperforms FreeBSD in most applications, including
WTW> networking overhead and disk speed. (Though most of this
WTW> "outperforming" is due to the default configurations of the
WTW> kernels and not any fundamental limitations).
Hmm, I cannot speak of all variants of hardware, but on my computer
(64MB RAM, P200, SCSI NCR 815) there's a significant difference in
favour of FreeBSD w.r.t. performance, especially when doing some
memory intensive things at the same time.
I run both, usually Linux because of availability of some apps I need,
but for sure FreeBSD runs faster; I've done some pretty extensive
benchmarks, also on various kinds of disk I/O.
Not that I'm critical of Linux, since it also performs quite well and
better than any Windows and most Unices, however. But I really feel
that for big servers FreeBSD is (still?) better.
--
/\_/\
( o.o ) Peter Mutsaers | Abcoude (Utrecht), | Trust me, I know
) ^ ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] | the Netherlands | what I'm doing.
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject.
