Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 34

Thread: Nexenta 3.0 Benchmarked Against PC-BSD, OpenSolaris, Ubuntu

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,653

    Default Nexenta 3.0 Benchmarked Against PC-BSD, OpenSolaris, Ubuntu

    Phoronix: Nexenta 3.0 Benchmarked Against PC-BSD, OpenSolaris, Ubuntu

    With the release of Nexenta Core Platform 3.0 a few weeks back we decided to run some benchmarks of this operating system against PC-BSD 8.1, OpenSolaris b134, and Ubuntu 10.04.1 LTS. For those unfamiliar with Nexenta Core Platform, it is an operating system that combines the OpenSolaris kernel with a Linux user-land provided by the Ubuntu 8.04 LTS "Hardy Heron" package repository, complete with apt-get support for easy package installation.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=15281

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    42

    Default

    Ubuntu seemed to win this convincingly. Who would have known 'the most user-friendly distro' also had some mean grunt under the hood?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    18

    Default

    RMS himself will smythe you for this sentence
    For those unfamiliar with Nexenta Core Platform, it is an operating system that combines the OpenSolaris kernel with a Linux user-land provided by the Ubuntu 8.04 LTS "Hardy Heron" package repository, complete with apt-get support for easy package installation.
    Linux userland!? Linux is a kernel, and has nothing to do with the userland part. The userland is GNU...

    I never thought Phoronix would stoop this low

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by andrnils View Post
    RMS himself will smythe you for this sentence

    Linux userland!? Linux is a kernel, and has nothing to do with the userland part. The userland is GNU...

    I never thought Phoronix would stoop this low
    Welcome to 2010.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    176

    Default

    Didn't notice that at first. Quite shocking, given that the Nexenta webpage also says GNU userland. Furthermore, not even a mention of GNU on the first page. I don't know what to say of the term "Linux userland" - hilarious, sarcastic or low. Often it is said GNU/Linux is truncated to Linux for convenience, but it looks like here GNU is conveniently forgotten . It doesn't matter if RMS is picky about mentioning GNU, at least due credit and respect should be given.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hdas View Post
    Didn't notice that at first. Quite shocking, given that the Nexenta webpage also says GNU userland. Furthermore, not even a mention of GNU on the first page. I don't know what to say of the term "Linux userland" - hilarious, sarcastic or low. Often it is said GNU/Linux is truncated to Linux for convenience, but it looks like here GNU is conveniently forgotten . It doesn't matter if RMS is picky about mentioning GNU, at least due credit and respect should be given.
    I agree. GNU/Linux shortened to Linux may be a matter of semantics and definitions, but I can't think of any valid definition or stretch of the imagination that would justify calling Nexenta's userland a "Linux" userland. If it were indeed a Linux userland, then point me to the userspace tools of Nexenta that are directly associated with the Linux Foundation's projects, please? Maybe you could argue that Git falls under that banner, but if the compiler, C library, default shell, default editor, and user management suite are all unaffiliated with the Linux project, it's more than just a stretch to call this a "Linux" userland.

    The only possible interpretation under which this could have any meaning is this: A Linux userland is the userland that you most commonly get when you run a Linux system. Given the fact that the overwhelming majority of Linux kernels are shipped alongside a GNU userland (hence GNU/Linux), we shorten the term "GNU/Linux userland" to "Linux userland", while indirectly referring to the same concept: take the userland tools shipped with a typical (GNU/)Linux distribution, plant them on top of a Solaris kernel, and there you've got Nexenta's "Linux userland". It's a very, very dubious rationalization, though, because logically speaking, it is simply incorrect.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by andrnils View Post
    RMS himself will smythe you for this sentence

    Linux userland!? Linux is a kernel, and has nothing to do with the userland part. The userland is GNU...

    I never thought Phoronix would stoop this low
    Simple typo when banging out a number of articles before leaving.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    Simple typo when banging out a number of articles before leaving.
    Hehe, seemd so intentional as there were more than one And calling Ubuntu an OS is also a bit of a stretch I guess, it's distro. Shuttleworth hasn't so far as I know created anything on the OS level, just modified packaging and UI


    BTW, are the test programs compiled in 64 or 32 bit mode? I'm not sure that it really should make any difference performance wise ( except perhaps for servers like apache ), but anyway. Has any comparison between linux 32- and 64 bit been done recently on that hardware? I seem to remember that at least on vanilla opensolaris most of the userland is 32bit wheter or not the kernel is 64bit.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by andrnils View Post
    Hehe, seemd so intentional as there were more than one And calling Ubuntu an OS is also a bit of a stretch I guess, it's distro. Shuttleworth hasn't so far as I know created anything on the OS level, just modified packaging and UI
    When doing find and replace I just saw the introduction mention of it... In the conclusion it said GNU userland originally.


    BTW, are the test programs compiled in 64 or 32 bit mode? I'm not sure that it really should make any difference performance wise ( except perhaps for servers like apache ), but anyway. Has any comparison between linux 32- and 64 bit been done recently on that hardware? I seem to remember that at least on vanilla opensolaris most of the userland is 32bit wheter or not the kernel is 64bit.
    See PTS for details on what test profiles are compiled or using a binary.

    Don't recall the last time I did 32-bit vs. 64-bit benchmarks of an OS, but a Phoronix site search would tell.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    85

    Default

    Theoretically, you could use a SunOS kernel but run everything in an "lx"-branded zone, so you're running Linux ELF binaries. Then it would be technically correct to call it a Linux user-land. Same would be true if you were running the FreeBSD kernel and all your apps in the Linuxulator.

    Not that I'm saying that Nexenta does that...

Posting Permissions

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