Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 78

Thread: Fedora, Debian, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, OpenSolaris Benchmarks

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    Yes, you're FUDing, because Linus meant different thing then you when he said "bloated".
    Linus says in the link I provided:
    "The kernel is huge and bloated, and our icache footprint is scary. I mean, there is no question about that. And whenever we add a new feature, it only gets worse."

    Actually, I find it hard to interpret this in another way than Linux is bloated. Linus T says explicitly "KERNEL IS BLOATED...THERE IS NO QUESTION ABOUT IT". He says so. But of course, what do I know. Probably he talked about Windows kernel, or he talk about James Bond having a dinner and getting bloated, or maybe he just meant that... the Linux kernel is bloated? I mean, come on, Linus T SAYS it is bloated. He says so. But no, Linus didnt mean that? How do you know what Linus means? Can you read his mind?

    I feel like trying to convince a madman:
    -Look, it is raining.
    -No it is not
    -Well you are wet. It IS raining!
    -No I am not wet
    -But you just dried water off from your face, you are WET! Hallo? You are WET!
    -No I am not.

    I mean... what else can you say? If he refuses to admit he is wet, then I can say nothing more. Clearly, he is a crazy madman. Or just plain weird? What do you think if you met a guy that behaved just like that?


    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    You're FUDing also about scalability etc.
    Oh yes? I posted lots of links about Linux bad scalability, for instance, on SAP benchmarks, from www.sap.com. SUN does not own SAP, SAP it is not SUN propaganda, just as you claim. The SAP certified benches show that SAP on Linux on 8 CPUs, had only 87% CPU utilization. On Solaris, the 8 cpus achieved 99% utilization (scales better). I have been taught that 87% is less than 99%. But hey, what do I know? Maybe it is NOT raining, maybe 87% is more than 99%?
    http://download.sap.com/download.epd...11DE75E0922A14

    http://download.sap.com/download.epd...FCA652F4AD1B4C


    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    Btw. you didn't only link to SAP benchmarks and if you did, afaik it was meaningless. And why should I care explaining you a thing? I find this funny, because I know a little about you.
    Well, now I did it again! I linked to SAP benchmarks! And they dont count, because it seems that Linux is slower. If SAP benches proved that Linux was faster, then SAP would be a good reliable site, yes? You are a bit selective?


    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    At osnews.com people already answered probably to everything you're saying here about. That's why I consider you're trolling and what's the fact you're cross posting. You even quoted some person in one of your responses there who is even more known then you when comes to trolling :> (you even quoted his response from Phoronix from one of the threads you were trolling long ago).
    I must say that you have a strange opinion on what trolling is. To post links and official benchmarks is Trolling? Then I understand why dont consider yourself as a Troll: because you never provide any relevant links!

    My opinion on a Troll differs from your opinion. I think most people's view on Troll agrees with mine. If so, then it is YOU that is the Troll. If you can not back up your claims (which I always ask you to do, but you never do) then you are spreading lies and FUD and are Trolling. You have accused me of being a liar, but never once, provided any evidence on that. Never ever. So, what you claim is not true, I dont lie. In that case, it is you that lies about me. And hence, you are the liar. Not me. QED!

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    18

    Default

    Could you please stop your bickering. Your issuses have nothing to do with the article, so please use pm...

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Hellas
    Posts
    1,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kebabbert View Post
    For instance I claim that Linux kernel is bloated, I have claimed that for a long time, several years, and posted links where Linux kernel developers such as Andrew Morton agrees. Of course you have always objected to that, saying I am FUDing about Linux bloat. Only recently, even Linus Torvals himself admitted that Linus is bloated:
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09..._bloated_huge/

    "LinuxCon 2009 Linux creator Linus Torvalds says the open source kernel has become "bloated and huge," with no midriff-slimming diet plan in sight."

    So where am I lying here? Or FUDing? Even Linux creator agrees! Or do you mean I am lying and FUDing about Linux bloat, then also Linus Torvalds is lying and FUDing? This bloat I have known for many years, and you have always categorically denied and claimed I am only FUDing! But now Linus is agreeing with me. Enough said. It IS true that Linux is bloated.

    So no FUD, nor lies here. This is true.
    Hey! We had that discussion before and I gave you the statistics about the Linux kernel. You didn't even commented or countered my answer but now you make posts as if that conversation hadn't take place at all. I can only consider this as a neglect of the facts in purpose...

  4. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Apopas View Post
    Hey! We had that discussion before and I gave you the statistics about the Linux kernel. You didn't even commented or countered my answer but now you make posts as if that conversation hadn't take place at all. I can only consider this as a neglect of the facts in purpose...
    Exactly, this troll uses such tactics. He also "forgot" his osnews.com discussions. He's also accusing others to what exactly he's doing himself like straw man arguments. However, what to expect from person who loves sun and zfs:

    http://markmail.org/message/jytcfqdg...+state:results

    According to this webpage, there are some errors that makes ZFS unusable under
    certain conditions. That is not really optimal for an Enterprise file system. In
    my opinion the ZFS team should focus on bug correction instead of adding new
    functionality. The functionality that exists far surpass any other file system,
    therefore it is better to fix bugs. In my opinion.
    If there are complaints, what should SUN do? Should the complaints be taken
    seriously or not? Me love ZFS, and I dont want it to loose it's credibility.
    BTW, ZFS rocks. Hard.
    Ok, so you mean the comments are mostly FUD and bull shit? Because there are no
    bug reports from the whiners? Could this be the case? It is mostly FUD? Hmmm...?
    Orvar Korvar - Kebabbert, Kebbaber... yep, I know how this sounds. However, it's becoming less funny when you're reading all this bull.

    Oh yes? I posted lots of links about Linux bad scalability, for instance, on [COLOR=#00C800 ! important][COLOR=#00C800 ! important]SAP[/COLOR][/COLOR] benchmarks, from www.sap.com. SUN does not own SAP, SAP it is not SUN propaganda, just as you claim. The SAP certified benches show that SAP on Linux on 8 CPUs, had only 87% CPU utilization. On Solaris, the 8 cpus achieved 99% utilization (scales better). I have been taught that 87% is less than 99%. But hey, what do I know? Maybe it is NOT raining, maybe 87% is more than 99%?
    And you're showing me two different benchmarks? Good joke.
    Last edited by kraftman; 01-26-2010 at 04:39 PM.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by andrnils View Post
    Could you please stop your bickering. Your issuses have nothing to do with the article, so please use pm...
    I posted something about they should try the latest OpenSolaris build. That is all I posted.

    Then Kraftman came in here and attacked me, say I Troll again and lie and FUD etc. So who has problems, he or I? I think you should try to talk to Kraftman, not me?


    Quote Originally Posted by Apopas View Post
    Hey! We had that discussion before and I gave you the statistics about the Linux kernel. You didn't even commented or countered my answer but now you make posts as if that conversation hadn't take place at all. I can only consider this as a neglect of the facts in purpose...
    No, you did not discuss this before. You talked earlier about number of Lines of Code, yes. You showed that Linux code is mostly device drivers and other architectures, yes, so I dont mention the number of LoC anymore, today. Thanks to your proof. See how simple it is to prove something? Just some us some links, instead of claiming things out of the blue. Proofs and links are always better. They work. I shut up if I see proofs. That is true. That is the reason I have asked Kraftman to show proofs, but he never does. Never.

    But here I am quoting Linus T who says the kernel is bloated. Bloat is not the same thing as number of LoC. Is it not a fact that Linus T said the kernel is bloated? Is it not a fact that several Linux kernel developers said that Linux is buggy? Have I not posted such links? Am I lying?


    Quote Originally Posted by Kraftman View Post
    Exactly, this troll uses such tactics. He also "forgot" his osnews.com discussions.
    What tactics do I use? What did I forget now? Can you quote that osnews.com discussion?

    Regarding when I posted concerns about ZFS having problems, so what? I have written earlier that ZFS has problems, here. Everyone knows that ZFS is not really mature yet. It takes many years before a filesystem becomes mature and stable, BTRFS will not be usable within at least, 5 years from when it goes live, in the datacenters. Sure, you can use BTRFS in your home system, but that is another thing. If a filesystem has problems, it does not say anything about the Solaris kernel scaling well, does it? I dont understand what you are trying to prove with that link.

    I have also posted here that OpenSolaris, which has not hit beta yet, is buggy. So what? Why dont you show us links where I write that OpenSolaris is buggy? What are you trying to prove? *confused*

    Yes, you provide links about my earlier posts. I bet you sit and google for my nick the entire day and collect links what I have written. But you dont provide links that back up your claims! When you claim Solaris is buggy and scales bad, you never back up such links! Yes, you prove that I say that ZFS is buggy, but I have never said the opposite - I have never claimed that ZFS is bug free! Never. You have proven nothing with your link. Do you understand what you have proven? Nothing.

    Could you, instead of googling my posts, google after relevant posts that backs up your claims about Solaris being slow and buggy and unstable and scaling bad? You have never showed one link that supports that, despite claiming that numerous times. I have always posted links upon request.



    EDIT: what different SAP benchmarks have I showed you? Could you link to both, so I can see? Sometimes it is hard to follow you.

  6. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kebabbert View Post
    I posted something about they should try the latest OpenSolaris build. That is all I posted.

    Then Kraftman came in here and attacked me, say I Troll again and lie and FUD etc. So who has problems, he or I? I think you should try to talk to Kraftman, not me?
    You're a known troll who usually advertises SUN.

    Could you, instead of googling my posts, google after relevant posts that backs up your claims about Solaris being slow and buggy and unstable and scaling bad? You have never showed one link that supports that, despite claiming that numerous times. I have always posted links upon request.
    It was done before. Here and it seems also at osnews.com.

    EDIT: what different SAP benchmarks have I showed you? Could you link to both, so I can see? Sometimes it is hard to follow you.
    From this page:

    http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showp...3&postcount=21

    different memory amount. However, everything was said long ago, but if you want to talk start a new thread. Btw. it seems there's something wrong with your head

    Could you, instead of googling my posts, google after relevant posts that backs up your claims about Solaris being slow and buggy and unstable and scaling bad? You have never showed one link that supports that, despite claiming that numerous times. I have always posted links upon request.
    I gave you such link. Btw. did I mentioned here about Solaris being slow or buggy?
    Last edited by kraftman; 01-26-2010 at 05:03 PM.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    You're a known troll who usually advertises SUN.
    You usually advertises Linux. It is ok if you advertise Linux, but it is a bad thing if I advertise SUN? Have I understood you correctly?


    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    It was done before. Here and it seems also at osnews.com.
    Oh yes? In that case, you can quote some of the links that shows that Solaris scales bad, is unstable and buggy. Go ahead. Do it. Or are you just lying, again?


    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    Different memory amount. However, everything was said long ago, but if you want to talk start a new thread. Btw. it seems there's something wrong with your head
    What are you talking about, "different memory amount"? Could you be clearer? When have I posted to different SAP benchmarks with different RAM amount? Could you link to both, so we can see what you are talking about?


    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    I gave you such link. Btw. did I mentioned here about Solaris being slow or buggy?
    Please give me that link again. In this thread you have not mentioned that about Solaris, but you have claimed that numerous times earlier, without providing any relevant links. Never. So please give that link now.
    Last edited by kebabbert; 01-26-2010 at 05:03 PM.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    418

    Default

    Come on, instead of talking about different links, can you just post them instead so we know which links you are talking about? Or does the links not exist? You show links about my earlier posts, so well. Why cant you just show some other links, not about my posts? Links about my posts you can show, but no other links. Why? Come on. Just one link, that supports all those things you say. Just one.

  9. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kebabbert View Post
    You usually advertises Linux. It is ok if you advertise Linux, but it is a bad thing if I advertise SUN? Have I understood you correctly?
    Where I advertise it? What I do is trying to figure out why there's sometimes something wrong with it, or some benchmark etc.

    Oh yes? In that case, you can quote some of the links that shows that Solaris scales bad, is unstable and buggy. Go ahead. Do it. Or are you just lying, again?
    New thread please.

    What are you talking about, "different memory amount"? Could you be clearer? When have I posted to different SAP benchmarks with different RAM amount? Could you link to both, so we can see what you are talking about?
    Exactly what this means. Here: http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showp...3&postcount=21 few posts earlier. Another problems with memory?

    Please give me that link again. In this thread you have not mentioned that about Solaris, but you have claimed that numerous times earlier, without providing any relevant links. Never. So please give that link now.
    Nope, because afaik you never gave me a single relevant link. Why should I bother? Like I said, start a new thread.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Hellas
    Posts
    1,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kebabbert View Post
    No, you did not discuss this before.
    When I say before I mean during the time I made that post my link shows...

    But here I am quoting Linus T who says the kernel is bloated. Bloat is not the same thing as number of LoC. Is it not a fact that Linus T said the kernel is bloated? Is it not a fact that several Linux kernel developers said that Linux is buggy? Have I not posted such links? Am I lying?
    Bloated and buggy are different things.
    Back then, you had claimed that Linux kernel is bloated by providing two factss:
    a) Linus says so
    b) Linux has 11 million of LoC

    What's the purpose of providing the LoC if not for justifying bloatness after all?
    Last edited by Apopas; 01-26-2010 at 05:33 PM.

Posting Permissions

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