3 ms·

I think that the engineers at Netflix "could figure it out". As a long time BSD fan (since 1998) who has had to accept the fact that Linux won out in the end,

I think that the engineers at Netflix "could figure it out". As a long time BSD fan (since 1998) who has had to accept the fact that Linux won out in the end, I can vouch that by far the biggest pain point on Linux is its networking stack. Whenever I have to do anything other than set an IP address I throw up in my mouth a little bit. Linux has/had its benefits (packaging, install base), but IPTables or its routing configuration isn't one of them. High performance is certainly achievable, but it has a lot of quirks. BSD's networking stack has always been more robust. Anybody who's worked heavily with both will tell you that. It did not surprise me one bit that the primary reason they chose FreeBSD over Linux for their CDN was networking. Juniper came to the same conclusion, on top of licensing reasons.

jaekash 6y ago
> I think that the engineers at Netflix "could figure it out". And I would still like to see some evidence. > Whenever I have to do anything other than set an IP address I throw up in my mouth a little bit. Very compelling case you make there.
- hylaride 6y ago
  > And I would still like to see some evidence. There are plenty of talks, papers, etc from both Juniper, Netflix, etc on why they made their choices, but your response is merely "could also be they did not understand how to configure Linux" without any evidence. We're not going to do your googling for you. > Very compelling case you make there. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/hyperbole https://www.dictionary.com/browse/hyperbole
  - jaekash 6y ago
    > There are plenty of talks, papers, etc from both Juniper, Netflix, etc on why they made their choices, but your response is merely "could also be they did not understand how to configure Linux" without any evidence. Here are the only sources I could find that gave some reasons for Netflix's choice: - https://people.freebsd.org/~scottl/Netflix-BSDCan-20130515.pdf https://people.freebsd.org/~scottl/Netflix-BSDCan-20130515.p... - https://youtu.be/KP_bKvXkoC4?t=732 https://youtu.be/KP_bKvXkoC4?t=732 Neither of them suggest FreeBSD was faster than Linux in their tests. From both of those sources I would say avoiding GPL was the primary consideration. If there is something to back your claim up, link to it. If you cannot link to it then how the heck do you expect me to find it. I'm not the person claiming it exists.
    - hylaride 6y ago
      In the presentation they literally list the TCP stack as a technical advantage. In the video the guy literally says kqueue and sendfile as superior freebsd code for their use case. Also, I never said it's "faster". Most modern OS's on modern hardware can saturate most networking links. I said robust. There's a difference in how much CPU will be uses as well has how stable and consistent it can be. I'm also not claiming FreeBSD is a magical solution to everything. I've long switched to Linux for various practical reasons, but there are some areas it still shines.
      - jaekash 6y ago
        > In the presentation they literally list the TCP stack as a technical advantage. At the timestamp I shared up to the next slide no comparison is made between Linux and FreeBSD. And the thread we were in is about someone claiming the reasons why Netflix chose FreeBSD was performance and not licensing. In fact, here is a direct debunk of that claim: https://youtu.be/vcyQBup-Gto?t=2739 https://youtu.be/vcyQBup-Gto?t=2739 Jonathan Looney, Engineering Manager at Netflix, claiming their primary reason for choosing FreeBSD was GPL avoidance and that subsequent performance testing (which was not the basis for their choice) is not exactly fair because they did not do the same amount of engineering work for Linux as they did for FreeBSD. > I said robust. And I said "And I would still like to see some evidence." ... that is more robust than your anecdotal reports of nausea, which I'm not sure really I can translate meaningfully to a measure of robustness. To which you suggested I should do your work for you like I'm your slave or something. If you can't back claims you make, don't make them, simple.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

jaekash 6y ago

> I think that the engineers at Netflix "could figure it out". And I would still like to see some evidence. > Whenever I have to do anything other than set an IP address I throw up in my mouth a little bit. Very compelling case you make there.

hylaride 6y ago
> And I would still like to see some evidence. There are plenty of talks, papers, etc from both Juniper, Netflix, etc on why they made their choices, but your response is merely "could also be they did not understand how to configure Linux" without any evidence. We're not going to do your googling for you. > Very compelling case you make there. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/hyperbole https://www.dictionary.com/browse/hyperbole
- jaekash 6y ago
  > There are plenty of talks, papers, etc from both Juniper, Netflix, etc on why they made their choices, but your response is merely "could also be they did not understand how to configure Linux" without any evidence. Here are the only sources I could find that gave some reasons for Netflix's choice: - https://people.freebsd.org/~scottl/Netflix-BSDCan-20130515.pdf https://people.freebsd.org/~scottl/Netflix-BSDCan-20130515.p... - https://youtu.be/KP_bKvXkoC4?t=732 https://youtu.be/KP_bKvXkoC4?t=732 Neither of them suggest FreeBSD was faster than Linux in their tests. From both of those sources I would say avoiding GPL was the primary consideration. If there is something to back your claim up, link to it. If you cannot link to it then how the heck do you expect me to find it. I'm not the person claiming it exists.
  - hylaride 6y ago
    In the presentation they literally list the TCP stack as a technical advantage. In the video the guy literally says kqueue and sendfile as superior freebsd code for their use case. Also, I never said it's "faster". Most modern OS's on modern hardware can saturate most networking links. I said robust. There's a difference in how much CPU will be uses as well has how stable and consistent it can be. I'm also not claiming FreeBSD is a magical solution to everything. I've long switched to Linux for various practical reasons, but there are some areas it still shines.
    - jaekash 6y ago
      > In the presentation they literally list the TCP stack as a technical advantage. At the timestamp I shared up to the next slide no comparison is made between Linux and FreeBSD. And the thread we were in is about someone claiming the reasons why Netflix chose FreeBSD was performance and not licensing. In fact, here is a direct debunk of that claim: https://youtu.be/vcyQBup-Gto?t=2739 https://youtu.be/vcyQBup-Gto?t=2739 Jonathan Looney, Engineering Manager at Netflix, claiming their primary reason for choosing FreeBSD was GPL avoidance and that subsequent performance testing (which was not the basis for their choice) is not exactly fair because they did not do the same amount of engineering work for Linux as they did for FreeBSD. > I said robust. And I said "And I would still like to see some evidence." ... that is more robust than your anecdotal reports of nausea, which I'm not sure really I can translate meaningfully to a measure of robustness. To which you suggested I should do your work for you like I'm your slave or something. If you can't back claims you make, don't make them, simple.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]