4 ms·

how does the kernel compare these days? pre-cfq i remember the scheduler was far better than linux, but what about raw performance for single and multithread/pr

by a-dub 4y ago

how does the kernel compare these days? pre-cfq i remember the scheduler was far better than linux, but what about raw performance for single and multithread/process workloads with lots of i/o going through the kernel? raw cve counts seem meaningless without a denominator to me. those numbers should be normalized by estimated install base if they're going to be compared.

jeffbee 4y ago
Yeah, the number of BSD CVEs just boils down to the fact that nobody cares about BSD. Since nobody cares about it, its performance is also very 20-years-ago and doesn't stand up to modern linux performance. You could expect database performance (e.g. postgresql) to be 2-4x higher on linux under a highly concurrent load. There are thousands of full-time professionals around the world focused on linux performance and the applications are co-evolving to work best on linux so you can't expect cutting-edge speed from freebsd. There's probably a niche for freebsd but unless you know exactly what it is and how to exploit that niche, you're not going to find it by accident.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- naikrovek 4y ago
  > the fact that nobody cares about BSD I am quite certain that you would be shocked if you learned how many people use it. I've worked at two companies where more than 95% of servers ran FreeBSD, and these are absolutely companies that you have heard of. 10s of thousands of servers at each when I worked at them, and likely 5x that amount, now. lots of people care about FreeBSD. they just aren't known for crapping on Linux, like Linux users are known for crapping on everything that is not Linux.
  - jen20 4y ago
    So who are these companies? I hear references to them constantly, but pretty much the only ones willing to stick their head above the parapet are Netflix (in a single use case) and a few storage/network vendors using proprietary forks.
    - ooneeks 4y ago
      I would scream if I ever saw a dude in a suit give some 70's looking NEET permission to base their company's entire IT platform on FreeBSD specifically. It'd be like switching all your office workstations from MacOS to Ubuntu or Linux Mint.
      - naikrovek 4y ago
        why? it's a valid decision to make. Linux is turbulent and uncoordinated. FreeBSD is the opposite of that.
        ooneeks 4y ago
        Because it's not worth the hours when it inevitably breaks, which corpo server setups always do. At least in my view, that is. If it's running GNU/Linux or, God forbid, Windows, honestly as the head of a larger company I can just make a guy or another company fix it asap, whereas with BSD you'll be reliant on a handful of people at the very most, and no one is going to help you. They'll help you to help yourself, but 2 hours spent on something where I could've just called up another big company and have them do it, is a waste of money. Also whilst Linux can update without reboot (I believe you even do kernel updates now?), as far as I know BSD is a lot more fond of rebooting. BSD as a whole is more turbulent and uncoordinated than GNU/Linux, honestly. It's the individual distros up against each other that makes BSD the more stable party, i.e BSD vs Debian. But sometimes, being coordinated and calm just means "not innovative". BSD is probably the furthest you can get from progress and innovation imo.
        naikrovek 4y ago
        FreeBSD is not some esoteric thing. it's actually a UNIX whereas Linux is not. for someone with only Linux experience, FreeBSD is a nearly trivial set of skills to pick up. you're smacking on FreeBSD and I dont think you know it as well as you could when making these arguments.
  - ooneeks 4y ago
    Well to be fair, most people using FreeBSD are also Linux users, save people indirectly using/'benefiting' from BSD, i.e in a work environment as you mentioned. Of course discounting Mac users (I honestly think that's a hilarious joke). It also strikes me that many companies use BSD simply to save money in an area where time =/= money, as BSD is very secure and very stable, there are some licensing issues with many big Linux distros, etc. I very much doubt that anyone in the year 2022 are using BSD servers or workstations to improve their performance yield unless you're working retail or construction or something and are looking to implement a RTOS platform based on BSD because your boss severely capped your department's budget lol
    - a-dub 4y ago
      there was a time when freebsd's networking stack was pretty trendy for use in high performance networking settings. it was frequently used to implement things like software load balancers. quite possibly because of its (pre-linux-cfq) superior resource scheduling. there was also a time before it was trendy to complain about the GIL in python where SMP in freebsd suffered from the BKL. only one processor could be in the kernel at a time.

by a-dub 4y ago

jeffbee 4y ago

Yeah, the number of BSD CVEs just boils down to the fact that nobody cares about BSD. Since nobody cares about it, its performance is also very 20-years-ago and doesn't stand up to modern linux performance. You could expect database performance (e.g. postgresql) to be 2-4x higher on linux under a highly concurrent load. There are thousands of full-time professionals around the world focused on linux performance and the applications are co-evolving to work best on linux so you can't expect cutting-edge speed from freebsd. There's probably a niche for freebsd but unless you know exactly what it is and how to exploit that niche, you're not going to find it by accident.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
naikrovek 4y ago
> the fact that nobody cares about BSD I am quite certain that you would be shocked if you learned how many people use it. I've worked at two companies where more than 95% of servers ran FreeBSD, and these are absolutely companies that you have heard of. 10s of thousands of servers at each when I worked at them, and likely 5x that amount, now. lots of people care about FreeBSD. they just aren't known for crapping on Linux, like Linux users are known for crapping on everything that is not Linux.
- jen20 4y ago
  So who are these companies? I hear references to them constantly, but pretty much the only ones willing to stick their head above the parapet are Netflix (in a single use case) and a few storage/network vendors using proprietary forks.
  - ooneeks 4y ago
    I would scream if I ever saw a dude in a suit give some 70's looking NEET permission to base their company's entire IT platform on FreeBSD specifically. It'd be like switching all your office workstations from MacOS to Ubuntu or Linux Mint.
    - naikrovek 4y ago
      why? it's a valid decision to make. Linux is turbulent and uncoordinated. FreeBSD is the opposite of that.
      - ooneeks 4y ago
        Because it's not worth the hours when it inevitably breaks, which corpo server setups always do. At least in my view, that is. If it's running GNU/Linux or, God forbid, Windows, honestly as the head of a larger company I can just make a guy or another company fix it asap, whereas with BSD you'll be reliant on a handful of people at the very most, and no one is going to help you. They'll help you to help yourself, but 2 hours spent on something where I could've just called up another big company and have them do it, is a waste of money. Also whilst Linux can update without reboot (I believe you even do kernel updates now?), as far as I know BSD is a lot more fond of rebooting. BSD as a whole is more turbulent and uncoordinated than GNU/Linux, honestly. It's the individual distros up against each other that makes BSD the more stable party, i.e BSD vs Debian. But sometimes, being coordinated and calm just means "not innovative". BSD is probably the furthest you can get from progress and innovation imo.
        naikrovek 4y ago
        FreeBSD is not some esoteric thing. it's actually a UNIX whereas Linux is not. for someone with only Linux experience, FreeBSD is a nearly trivial set of skills to pick up. you're smacking on FreeBSD and I dont think you know it as well as you could when making these arguments.
- ooneeks 4y ago
  Well to be fair, most people using FreeBSD are also Linux users, save people indirectly using/'benefiting' from BSD, i.e in a work environment as you mentioned. Of course discounting Mac users (I honestly think that's a hilarious joke). It also strikes me that many companies use BSD simply to save money in an area where time =/= money, as BSD is very secure and very stable, there are some licensing issues with many big Linux distros, etc. I very much doubt that anyone in the year 2022 are using BSD servers or workstations to improve their performance yield unless you're working retail or construction or something and are looking to implement a RTOS platform based on BSD because your boss severely capped your department's budget lol
  - a-dub 4y ago
    there was a time when freebsd's networking stack was pretty trendy for use in high performance networking settings. it was frequently used to implement things like software load balancers. quite possibly because of its (pre-linux-cfq) superior resource scheduling. there was also a time before it was trendy to complain about the GIL in python where SMP in freebsd suffered from the BKL. only one processor could be in the kernel at a time.