4 ms·
Yea no problem, I'm having a hard time finding all the articles/ benchmarks I remember reading about this subject. But this paper has some useful info[1]. Basic
by 2trill2spill 9y ago
Yea no problem, I'm having a hard time finding all the articles/ benchmarks I remember reading about this subject. But this paper has some useful info[1]. Basically FreeBSD is good for throughput. In the paper I linked to you can see FreeBSD has a higher throughput than Linux, but you can also see that FreeBSD is using more CPU than Linux is. Also Linux generally has lower latency than FreeBSD, which makes sense because Linux is used extensively by high frequency trading firms. However there are still HFT firms using FreeBSD.
I'll edit this post as I find the other articles, videos and benchmarks about this subject.
Edit: I don't really care for Phoronix benchmarks but here's some benchmarks showing Linux winning some and FreeBSD winning some benchmarks[2].
[1]: http://conferences.sigcomm.org/hotnets/2013/papers/hotnets-final43.pdf http://conferences.sigcomm.org/hotnets/2013/papers/hotnets-f...
[2]: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=netperf-bsd-linux&num=1 http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=netperf-b...
- ovao 9y agoLots to dig into here, thanks!
- 2trill2spill 9y agoI also like this talk by a George Neville-Neil a FreeBSD networking engineer. Start at 57:45 [1]. That part of the talk is about differences in how the two different Network stacks are implemented. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mv_oKFzACM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mv_oKFzACM