Brandon L. Newport wrote:
The main thing we noticed was the network performance...it did not seem
to really slow under high loads. However overall it just tested
better...disk IO/mem/CPU/etc We tested with databases, web servers,
ftp, etc. Over all it just did better. That was a little over two
years ago. We will probably test again next year. One interesting
thing to note for anyone who has the on board promise IDE raid
cards...they work 200% better in FreeBSD than Linux....you can find a
dozen google search that talk about it. It is kinda interesting. Our
corporate web server uses IDE drives. Other than we dont have enough
memory in it right now it does great!!! (shoe maker kids)
-brandon
Okay, I feel I have to set the record straight on this one. Depending
on your application, it's entirely possible that you'd see equal or
better performance in some applications with OpenBSD. But to say that
performance across the board is better is at the least, misleading. As
opposed to attempting to clarify all of the results here, I'll just post
a link to the definitive comparison (at least in my mind) of the various
open source *NIX solutions. Check it out here:
http://bulk.fefe.de/scalability/ In summary, some of the OSes are
better at some things than others, and none of them have a uncontested
crown in all circumstances. This study deals particularly with how an
OS scales under higher loads, but if read carefully also provides
insight into which core functions of each OS have been optimized in
which ways.
Aaron S. Joyner
--
TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
TriLUG Organizational FAQ : http://trilug.org/faq/
TriLUG Member Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/
TriLUG PGP Keyring : http://trilug.org/~chrish/trilug.asc
