3 ms·
Main negatives about BSDs: more fiddly, not necessarily as well performing as a stable well optimised Linux release (read RHEL/CentOS), some compatibility probl
by csmuk 13y ago
Main negatives about BSDs: more fiddly, not necessarily as well performing as a stable well optimised Linux release (read RHEL/CentOS), some compatibility problems (usually due to crappy programming by Linux-heads), you might have to compile a load of stuff yourself.
The big wins are however: rock solid, wonderful documentation, entirely cohesive base system, small, big enterprise features (ZFS, mandatory access control, tracing frameworks, awesome network stack, security, ACL support and better hardware support.
When I say better hardware support, I mean the drivers all work rather better than their Linux counterparts rather than being plentiful and the supported platforms are plentiful and reliable.
I can drag a 17 year old SPARC64 machine out of the cupboard and just use it.
- jmspring 13y agoNot better performing? Whatsapp had an interesting presentation @ Erlang Factory worth considering -- http://www.erlang-factory.com/upload/presentations/558/efsf2012-whatsapp-scaling.pdf http://www.erlang-factory.com/upload/presentations/558/efsf2...
- csmuk 13y agoIt depends on the workload. Linux seems to scale to higher workloads slightly smoother without masses of tuning.
- profquail 13y agoBoth DragonFlyBSD and FreeBSD have improved their scalability on SMP systems over the past year or so. FreeBSD's improvements started in 9.1 and continued in 10; DragonFlyBSD claims to have eliminated nearly all lock contention within the kernel as of it's recent 3.6 release, and initial results look very promising.
- csmuk 13y agoYeah I noticed that on 9.1. I tried it on one of our "monster" 48 core boxes and it was pretty good with some sysctl poking. Waiting for 10 before serious evaluation starts when pkgng is default. That and freebsd-update pretty much nail it then for me.