FreeBSD 8.0, Ubuntu 9.10 Benchmarks

[VinDSL]

Good read! :thumbsup:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.p...eebsd8_ubuntu910&num=1 (Phoronix - FreeBSD 8.0 vs. Ubuntu 9.10 Benchmarks)

 

[Mem]

I would of liked to seen Kubuntu 9.10 included since that would of been interesting.

I guess most Linux users don't worry too much about speed,only layout and which Distro they prefer.

 

[Nothinman]

I guess most Linux users don't worry too much about speed,only layout and which Distro they prefer.

Pretty much. We're at the point now where performance problems are the corner cases and most Linux users don't play many games.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Seems pretty boring. The only surprise for me was the sqlite problems on ubuntu. With as much sqlite is getting used now I'd think that was more of a priority.

 

[Nothinman]

Seems pretty boring. The only surprise for me was the sqlite problems on ubuntu. With as much sqlite is getting used now I'd think that was more of a priority.

Maybe, but it would really only affect benchmarks, who would really use a SQLite database for 10,000+ records? And even if you were something enough to do that, it should only affect odd cases like restoring from backup.

And I know they stuck with defaults on purpose, but I ran that benchmark here and got an avg of 47.98s with XFS.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Seems pretty boring. The only surprise for me was the sqlite problems on ubuntu. With as much sqlite is getting used now I'd think that was more of a priority.

Maybe, but it would really only affect benchmarks, who would really use a SQLite database for 10,000+ records? And even if you were something enough to do that, it should only affect odd cases like restoring from backup.

And I know they stuck with defaults on purpose, but I ran that benchmark here and got an avg of 47.98s with XFS.

I think they mentioned it was a known regression WRT kernel version/ext4/sqlite version or something. I'm sure someone's looking at it or working on it, so still pretty boring.

 

[Fox5]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Seems pretty boring. The only surprise for me was the sqlite problems on ubuntu. With as much sqlite is getting used now I'd think that was more of a priority.

Maybe, but it would really only affect benchmarks, who would really use a SQLite database for 10,000+ records? And even if you were something enough to do that, it should only affect odd cases like restoring from backup.

And I know they stuck with defaults on purpose, but I ran that benchmark here and got an avg of 47.98s with XFS.

Err, there's several programs that do use sqlite as their backend and can easily get up to that size. Songbird, MythTV, and some wikipedia database program all do, iirc. Seems like a glitch with ext4 though, since it's generally at the top in every other benchmark. Then again, the exts have always been dog slow with databases, that's an area that XFS and ReiserFS always shined at.

 

[Nothinman]

Err, there's several programs that do use sqlite as their backend and can easily get up to that size. Songbird, MythTV, and some wikipedia database program all do, iirc. Seems like a glitch with ext4 though, since it's generally at the top in every other benchmark. Then again, the exts have always been dog slow with databases, that's an area that XFS and ReiserFS always shined at.

And of those I can really only see Songbird wanting to do all 10,000+ inserts at once during an intial library import, the rest would likely be just several rows at a time as you edit your wiki or add a video to your collection.

 

[Fox5]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Err, there's several programs that do use sqlite as their backend and can easily get up to that size. Songbird, MythTV, and some wikipedia database program all do, iirc. Seems like a glitch with ext4 though, since it's generally at the top in every other benchmark. Then again, the exts have always been dog slow with databases, that's an area that XFS and ReiserFS always shined at.

And of those I can really only see Songbird wanting to do all 10,000+ inserts at once during an intial library import, the rest would likely be just several rows at a time as you edit your wiki or add a video to your collection.

Unless you want to download and use the entire wikipedia archive offline, in which case you'll be waiting hours for that import to finish.
Songbird has a pretty long initial import period too, though not as bad as it is on windows and NTFS.