*BSD News Article 99973


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.Hawaii.Edu!news.caldera.com!enews.sgi.com!newshub1.home.com!news.home.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!news-sea-19.sprintlink.net!news-in-west.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!131.103.1.114!chi-news.cic.net!news.indiana.edu!not-for-mail
From: Lars Hofhansl <lhofhans@indiana.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. Linux
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 1997 18:05:03 -0400
Organization: Computer Science, Indiana University
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <33D13A0F.320017CB@indiana.edu>
References: <01bc8d33$3f7a4f00$6870d3c6@einstein> <33C4F625.41C67EA6@together.net> <pa7nq5.r51.ln@gate> <5qnvb7$5kg@news.gvsu.edu> <9mooq5.9c4.ln@gate> <5qrdfu$ca2$1@nntp2.ba.best.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pionier.eigenmann.indiana.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (X11; I; Linux 2.0.30 i586)
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:44688

>         I also have found that FreeBSD
>         handles large loads combined with high network traffic better then
>         my Linux box (Yes, I still run it on another machine).  My FreeBSD
>         box handles a number of *vary* large jobs on a regular basis that
>         both use heavy disk i/o, as well as heavy network i/o.  While these
>         ran fine on my Linux box, I always noticed a *high* drop in X server
>         performance when they were running. -It's also my workstation.  With
>         FreeBSD running these jobs, I can notice slower disk i/o, but the
>         X server never seems to miss a beat.  The workstation is just as
>         usable when running these jobs as when it's not.  This was never
>         really the case with my Linux box.  I'd just use another machine
>         while my Linux box was running these jobs.  With FreeBSD I no longer
>         have to.  

That is exactly what I experienced! I used Fbsd 2.1.5 and had to switch
to
Linux when I got my laptop. I found that large disk-intensive jobs can
render a Linux
box (up to 2.0.30) almost unusable whereas Fbsd 2.1.5 handled the job
and was still
usuable interactively (yes, also with the filesystem mounted async). I
don't think
things worsened in Fbsd 2.2.2.

I would also like to rephrase a question:
How stable is PAO for Fbsd? Has anyone experienced any problems?


	Lars


-- 
Legal Warning: Anyone sending me unsolicited/commercial email
WILL be charged a $100 proof-reading fee. See US Code Title 47,
Sec.227(a)(2)(B), Sec.227(b)(1)(C) and Sec.227(b)(3)(C).