I know http://bulk.fefe.de/scalability/ is wrong / outdated /
non-scientific / whatever... But what about this? Phoronix has more
credibility imho...
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=articleitem=linux_bsd_opensolarisnum=1
Best Regards,
Ektor
I'm missing info about how much and where is real crypto and security
techniques used in those systems. Oh waitit's Phoronix. Now it's
clear. I have better toy then you benchmark type :-)
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Ektor WetterstrC6m ektw...@gmail.com
wrote:
I know
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Ektor Wetterstrvm ektw...@gmail.com wrote:
I know http://bulk.fefe.de/scalability/ is wrong / outdated /
non-scientific / whatever... But what about this? Phoronix has more
credibility imho...
On 06/23/10 06:36, Ektor Wetterstrvm wrote:
I know http://bullshit.fefe.de/ is wrong / outdated /
non-scientific / whatever... But what about this? Phoronix has more
credibility imho...
[benchmarks]
facinating number of posts like this recently, all from gmail users
we've never seen
Hi
Very good performance putty :)
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 12:36:38 +0200, Ektor WetterstrC6m ektw...@gmail.com
wrote:
I know http://bulk.fefe.de/scalability/ is wrong / outdated /
non-scientific / whatever... But what about this? Phoronix has more
credibility imho...
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 1:01 PM, Nick Holland
n...@holland-consulting.net wrote:
On 06/23/10 06:36, Ektor Wetterstrvm wrote:
I know http://bullshit.fefe.de/ is wrong / outdated /
non-scientific / whatever... But what about this? Phoronix has more
credibility imho...
[benchmarks]
facinating
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 12:36:38PM +0200, Ektor Wetterstrvm wrote:
I know http://bulk.fefe.de/scalability/ is wrong / outdated /
non-scientific / whatever... But what about this? Phoronix has more
credibility imho...
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 1:01 PM, Nick Holland
n...@holland-consulting.net wrote:
On 06/23/10 06:36, Ektor Wetterstrvm wrote:
I know http://bullshit.fefe.de/ is wrong / outdated /
non-scientific / whatever... But what about this? Phoronix has more
credibility imho...
[benchmarks]
facinating
I agree, but you should admit that OpenBSD is clearly a looser in
regard to pure performances (e.g. I/O, compression, encryption,
etc.)
Yes, if my goal is to have ZOMG AWEZUMZ benchmarks, clearly OpenBSD
is a douchebag.
But if I want a system that doesn't make me want to initiate a mass-
I agree, but you should admit that OpenBSD is clearly a looser in
regard to pure performances (e.g. I/O, compression, encryption,
etc.)
Nick.
Bye,
Ektor
They should have also ran tests on multiple hardware, single core and
32bit.
32 bit, out performs 64bit on OpenBSD, atleast in my
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Ektor WetterstrC6m ektw...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 1:01 PM, Nick Holland
n...@holland-consulting.net wrote:
On 06/23/10 06:36, Ektor Wetterstrvm wrote:
I know http://bullshit.fefe.de/ is wrong / outdated /
non-scientific / whatever... But what
crickets chirping
yawn
/crickets chirping
Continues working...
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 07:01:44 -0400, Nick Holland wrote:
On 06/23/10 06:36, Ektor Wetterstrvm wrote:
I know http://bullshit.fefe.de/ is wrong / outdated /
non-scientific / whatever... But what about this? Phoronix has more
credibility imho...
[benchmarks]
facinating number of posts like
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 13:20:34 +0200, Ektor Wetterstrvm wrote:
Bye,
Promise?
*** NOTE *** Please DO NOT CC me. I am subscribed to the list.
Mail to the sender address that does not originate at the list server is
tarpitted. The reply-to: address is provided for those who feel compelled to
reply
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Rod Whitworth glis...@witworx.com wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 13:20:34 +0200, Ektor Wetterstrvm wrote:
Bye,
Promise?
Sure, this is my last mail on the topic. I only wanted to know Your
opinions about these types of benchmarks...
By the way, I like OpenBSD and I
By the way, I like OpenBSD and I really appreciate its strong points
but, unlike You, I have no problems in admitting its weaknesses (I see
to much zealotry here)...
Not that I have a lot of room to talk because I haven't submitted a patch
yet... However, I think the general belief is that
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 08:39:20AM -0400, Adam M. Dutko wrote:
Not that I have a lot of room to talk because I haven't submitted a patch
yet...
this statement is weird, in some way.
reyk
this statement is weird, in some way.
I concur. I'll shutup. :-)
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 7:57 AM, Reyk Floeter r...@openbsd.org wrote:
this statement is weird, in some way.
that statement is self-referential . . . so, I agree, it's a bit weird ;-)
reyk
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 14:29:24 +0200
Ektor WetterstrC6m ektw...@gmail.com wrote:
(I see to much zealotry here)...
It is not zealotry at all. Just a want to be straight and get things
correct. Questions which turn out, to be next to meaningless in the
real world, can annoy.
If I knew what tests
What are the unsurpassable real world weaknesses in OpenBSD, that you
know of?
Lots of fake people attacking the project on the mailing lists makes
them a poor resource for users.
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Kevin Chadwick ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
What are the unsurpassable real world weaknesses in OpenBSD, that you
know of?
Lack of proper SMP support, inefficient threading (old userland-only
thread library), no support for modern filesystems (not even FFS2!),
2010/6/24, Ektor WetterstrC6m ektw...@gmail.com:
filesystems (not even FFS2!),
??
Please take a look at man newfs?
--
IMPORTANT: DO NOT send me Microsoft Office/Apple iWork documents.
--
IMPORTANT: DO NOT send me Microsoft Office/Apple iWork documents.
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 04:53:09PM +0200, Ektor Wetterstrvm wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Kevin Chadwick ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
What are the unsurpassable real world weaknesses in OpenBSD, that you
know of?
Lack of proper SMP support, inefficient threading (old
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 04:53:09PM +0200, Ektor Wetterstr?m wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Kevin Chadwick ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
What are the unsurpassable real world weaknesses in OpenBSD, that you
know of?
Lack of proper SMP support, inefficient threading (old
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 16:53:09 +0200
Ektor WetterstrC6m ektw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Kevin Chadwick ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk
wrote:
What are the unsurpassable real world weaknesses in OpenBSD, that you
know of?
Lack of proper SMP support, inefficient threading (old
OpenBSD pleases me every day, Linux annoys me half the time.
The number of mass casualty events avoided is the true metric
by which operating systems should be measured.
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 18:08:34 +0100
Kevin Chadwick ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Would you run X on your linux server, because it's easier. I wouldn't
trade PF for better threading any day and you can always use multiple
systems, whilst wasting very little power these days, if you try. It's
far
facinating number of posts like this recently, all from gmail users
we've never seen before...
Yes, it's troll year.
On Wednesday 23 June 2010 11:16:37 Marco Peereboom wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 04:53:09PM +0200, Ektor Wetterstr?m wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Kevin Chadwick ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk
wrote:
What are the unsurpassable real world weaknesses in OpenBSD, that you
know of?
30 matches
Mail list logo
