Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!nntp.coast.net!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!news From: Ken Bigelow <kbigelow@www.play-hookey.com> Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Linux Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 07:09:11 +0000 Organization: Erol's Internet Services Lines: 47 Message-ID: <32560997.79E1@www.play-hookey.com> References: <3246f8e0.1466924@news.telepac.pt> <324924E5.49B6@usoft.nl> <324AC49E.1CD3@pressconnect.com> <52pfff$d93@uriah.heep.sax.de> <52qhfj$o6a@nz12.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de> <m2n2y4f17u.fsf@golfgod.raleigh.ibm.com> Reply-To: kbigelow@www.play-hookey.com NNTP-Posting-Host: kenjb05.play-hookey.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) Thomas Evans wrote: > > In article <52qhfj$o6a@nz12.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de> erb@inss1.etec.uni-karlsruhe.de (Olaf Erb) writes: > > > I can. We've been running a FTP/http/www-proxy for some years under Linux. > > Now I switched the mess (really a mess, old Slackware Distribution with > > lots of chaos in there ;) to FreeBSD and I got what I expected: > > > > FreeBSD performs much more better than Linux under high load (it's smoother) > > and, the most important thing, networking is better (more stable and faster). > > And no more hassels with this libc/kernel/gcc version conflicts that annoy > > you regularly. > > The networking code has changed alot since 1.2.13 days, get 2.0 if you > plan on trying out Linux. But since BSD is the standard, and thanks to > Stevens, Leffler, is better documented, it probably is the more > popular choice. > It would be interesting to have have some 3rd party test FreeBSD 2.1.5 > vs Linux 2.0 vs NT. Forget NT for high volume. We've been trying it at work and it *stinks!* But then, what do you expect when its own monitoring software shows that it uses 5% of CPU time just to maintain a static GUI presentation, and just moving the mouse pointer across a set of three open windows is enough to kick it over 50% briefly? This is NT 4.0 installed from CD. The other NT server we have in place can be freshly reset on Friday, and by Monday morning it's running like a broken wheel -- sslllooowww. At the same time, we've got a FreeBSD machine up and running as our mail server as well as running apache. No crashes and it's been ticking along nicely since we reset it during a power problem in our building last May. We actually tried Linux first: both Slackware and Caldera. We had some assorted problems with both in our situation, and found that FreeBSD suited us much better. But go ahead and test Linux and FreeBSD; they are at least reasonable in this kind of context. Also take a look through the thread "Unix too slow..." in this NG for some comments from others about NT versus Unix clones. -- Ken Are you interested in | byte-sized education | http://www.play-hookey.com over the Internet? |