Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 61 to 68 of 68

Thread: Ubuntu vs. OpenSolaris vs. FreeBSD Benchmarks

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    418

    Default

    ENERGYMAN,
    Im sure he would like that Solaris box!

    Actually, I would prefer that he benchmarked the full blown Linux to the real Solaris 10, instead of benchmarking two home brewn Solaris distros that doesnt work (v0.51 or so), made by some random people. To me, it is like comparing Solaris 10 to a Linux distro v0.51 in Beta. Why do that, when the latest Ubuntu is available? Do we want a fair comparison so everyone can make their own opinions, or do we want to distort things? Is it a fair benchmark? Or not?

    If I would benchmark Solaris 10 against Ubuntu v0.51 - would you accept my benchmark?







    KRAFTMAN,
    I couldnt find the article where they stated that: "Google has been looking for Solaris admins", "there are lots of ex SUN people at Google having vast experience of Solaris", "Google is looking at Solaris".

    And I dont think youre argument about Google would just use Solaris if it was better, is valid. Let me rephrase your argument a bit:
    "If Linux could compare with Windows, other companies would just use Linux. You are just flaming. Linux is not better than Windows, because Windows has greater market share. If Linux were better, Linux would have the greatest market share. But Windows have the greatest share, which is proving that Windows is best". Do you think this rephrased argument is valid or invalid? If it is invalid, then why is your version valid? As I said earlier, the best tech doesnt always win. Windows has bad tech, and wins. VHS had bad tech, and wun over Betamax. The examples are numerous.



    Thanks for backing up your statements with some hard facts. However, I would like other links if you would be so kind. Reason:

    1. What would you think if I showed you benchmarks of Linux on 400 MHz machine vs Solaris using dual Xeon 2.8 GHz? You would be totally mad and yell and accuse me of being a cheater? So, it is ok that you show me such links, but I can not show you such links? I would prefer benchmarks, Linux vs Solaris on the same hardware. That would be fair?

    2. That is an old benchmark, old Solaris 9 with old filesystem UFS. Do you have any newer benchmarks with Solaris 10 and ZFS instead? Even if Linux v2.4 were faster back then, Im not really convinced that I should install Linux v2.4 on my computer right now. I am interested of the current state. Even if solaris v8 was faster than Linux v2.2 I wouldnt install Solaris v8 right now. To me the history is not important, because that would be disadvantageous to Linux - Linux is a young kernel and Solaris was mature back then. I couldnt compare Linux v0.9 to Solaris v7. That would not be fair. the history is not important to me. I am interested in the current state.

    I appreciate you take your time to educate me about Linux performance and stability.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,730

    Default

    em, you know what schillix is? You know who is behind it? 'random people'? hardly ....

  3. #63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kebabbert View Post

    I appreciate you take your time to educate me about Linux performance and stability.
    ROTFL. I won't waste my time anymore. Better educate yourself, there's much you should find out. And you are flaming. MS has monopoly etc. etc. your arguments are just idiotic. Farewell. I posted another benchmark in which Solaris is just terribly slow. You can find it some post before.


    Oh, and you're trolling here. As I said before if you want to discuss some things post a new thread.
    Last edited by kraftman; 12-04-2008 at 04:06 PM.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    ROTFL. I won't waste my time anymore. Better educate yourself, there's much you should find out. And you are flaming. MS has monopoly etc. etc. your arguments are just idiotic. Farewell. I posted another benchmark in which Solaris is just terribly slow. You can find it some post before.


    Oh, and you're trolling here. As I said before if you want to discuss some things post a new thread.
    You posted only 2 benchmarks that I discussed, right? And both were invalid, as I pointed out. Ive searched on your nick name, and didnt find other Solaris benchmarking posts.

    Thanx for the discussion. If you can find any links showing that Linux is more stable, faster or whatever than Solaris, I would be interested to see them. I mean it. Then please post them here. You know that there are lots of links showing the opposite? It is easy to find them. Just google Solaris vs Linux or something similar.

    You see, only hard facts impress upon me. You can state whatever you want, but that doesnt really matter. Only benchmarks and hard facts count. Otherwise it is just opionions and marketing talk. That is why I prefer Solaris right now because there are lots of links showing Solaris being superior, but no links showing Linux being superior. Why is that, if Linux really were superior?

    PS. I still would like to know more about your statement that you have tried both Solaris and Linux, and Linux came out on top. How, and when did you do that? In what aspect did Solaris fail? You havent answered. Is it true that you did try both out?

    Anyway, farewell for now.







    ENERGYMAN,
    No, I dont know the people behind Schillix. Should I? There are only two developers doing Schillix. None of them known to me. I would call them two, random guys. I would like to see Solaris 10 against a full version of Linux. Not some crippled versions. I am not interested in comparing S10 against Linux on an old machine. I really want to see, which is the best OS? Then I just install that OS and use it. I know how to use both of them. Theyre both Unix.

    If you are trying to get an opionion about something, you want to compare them on equal grounds, right? That is what I want. Equal grounds. I dont think that Solaris on 400 MHz CPU vs Linux dual Xeon 2.8 GHz CPU is equal grounds. That benchmark doesnt say anything about the OSes, it only says that Xeon 2.8GHz is faster than 400MHz CPU. And comparing a Solaris Niagara machine vs a Linux Xeon machine doesnt say anything about the OSes, the Linux machine would loose so hard on every benchmark, but that only proves that Niagara is superior CPU. Which is uninteresting. That benchmark says nothing about the OS.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,730

    Default

    yes, you really should know Jörg Schilling. If you know anything about Solaris, SCSI, cd burning, you should know that name.

  6. #66

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kebabbert View Post
    You posted only 2 benchmarks that I discussed, right? And both were invalid, as I pointed out. Ive searched on your nick name, and didnt find other Solaris benchmarking posts.

    Thanx for the discussion. If you can find any links showing that Linux is more stable, faster or whatever than Solaris, I would be interested to see them. I mean it. Then please post them here. You know that there are lots of links showing the opposite? It is easy to find them. Just google Solaris vs Linux or something similar.
    Your benchmarks and arguments are invalid and sometimes stupid. I can discuss it, give you some links, but you have to post a new thread, because I don't want you to trash this one.

    You see, only hard facts impress upon me. You can state whatever you want, but that doesnt really matter. Only benchmarks and hard facts count. Otherwise it is just opionions and marketing talk. That is why I prefer Solaris right now because there are lots of links showing Solaris being superior, but no links showing Linux being superior. Why is that, if Linux really were superior?

    PS. I still would like to know more about your statement that you have tried both Solaris and Linux, and Linux came out on top. How, and when did you do that? In what aspect did Solaris fail? You havent answered. Is it true that you did try both out?

    Anyway, farewell for now.
    Beginning from end - you didn't answered some of my questions. It seems that you didn't try Linux and Solaris on desktop, otherwise you should notice that responsiveness is better in Linux. Oh, do you know what amount of memory is recommended for Solaris? Imagine, Sun is falling, there are many Solaris fanboys and everyone can do benchmarks. I bet that many of them are made by Sun friends. Phoronix benchmark is more objective in this case (hopefully). You showed me benchmark in which Solaris is better on greater number of CPU's. In my opinion this benchmark is crap, because of problem with one library which breaks scaling on Linux. I bet person who did that test didn't replaced broken library, but ok, it doesn't matter right now. I wonder why you consider that Solaris is better, faster etc. if you only base your opinions on one type of test? Have you anything more to say about Linux stability? How do you test it (in one of my links Solaris just hung)? I'd love to know why Solaris came out on top for you. Because of some Sun friendly links?

    I can answer you previous posts and continue discussion , but post a new thread ok?

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    418

    Default

    Kraftman,

    Thanx for answering. Ok, I will create a new thread in a few days. Right now I have to deliver a project in my job in another country, so I have to fly tomorrow and it is crazy work hours right now. See you soon!

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Thank you very much Phoronix. This test was exactly what I was looking for!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •