Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Thread: DragonFlyBSD Improves Performance Against Linux

  1. #11

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by enjolras View Post
    Yes you're right. Linux rox, and has no scalability issue, it's well known. And postgresql scales easily on latest linux kernels. Oh wait ! http://http://lwn.net/Articles/518329/
    Only two posts and a big fail. You linked to unreleased version. It will be nice to see some newer Linux distro rather than old SL. Btw. I always wondered why it'sFreeBSD pushed so hard rather than DragonFlyBSD. The later is not only faster, has great community, but it's also much more innovative. In contrary freebsd community are just envy fanboys and trolls.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    260

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    Only two posts and a big fail. You linked to unreleased version. It will be nice to see some newer Linux distro rather than old SL. Btw. I always wondered why it'sFreeBSD pushed so hard rather than DragonFlyBSD. The later is not only faster, has great community, but it's also much more innovative. In contrary freebsd community are just envy fanboys and trolls.
    Why are you always bitching about FreeBSD/Solaris/insert-your-non-Linux-OS-here? (I'm surprised you have something kind to say about DragonFlyBSD).
    You criticize FreeBSD for having a fanboy comunity, but you always sound like a fanboy yourself.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XorEaxEax View Post
    I someone who regularly benchmarks clang/llvm vs GCC I can say I've not seen any results (atleast not as recent as this year, before that my memory may fail me) where clang/llvm beats GCC where I use -O3
    Well, if you compare GCC 4.4 to LLVM 3.2 it might be different.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    Only two posts and a big fail. You linked to unreleased version. It will be nice to see some newer Linux distro rather than old SL. Btw. I always wondered why it'sFreeBSD pushed so hard rather than DragonFlyBSD. The later is not only faster, has great community, but it's also much more innovative. In contrary freebsd community are just envy fanboys and trolls.
    It would be interesting to see newer Linux Distro's benchmarked, but SL is a good comparison. In terms of server operating systems, the SL tested is basically present day. Debian and anything compiled with Redhat(CentOS and SL) all use similar kernels. You don't see too many (if any) popular Linux server Distros use the newer kernels.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    366

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XorEaxEax View Post
    I someone who regularly benchmarks clang/llvm vs GCC I can say I've not seen any results (atleast not as recent as this year, before that my memory may fail me) where clang/llvm beats GCC where I use -O3, which is the optimization level where the compilers strive to produce the fastest code. And as we can see from the results you linked to, whenever -O3 is used GCC is 'superior' to clang/llvm, and also in most of the cases where no optimization level is set (which really doesn't count though as it is worthless) and the only times clang/llvm beats GCC is when there is no -O optimization level which means GCC defaults to -O0 which is 'no optimization' and aimed for debugging.

    Typically my tests results in 5-20% better performance with GCC versus clang/llvm, and when I've tried the GCC 4.8 versus LLVM 3.2 snapshots GCC has actually increased the performance gap (that said, snapshots are anything but conclusive). It should be noted that my benchmarks are all on x86_64, I have no idea of how x86 or for example ARM architectures compare.

    On another note I find Dragonfly most interesting from a technical standpoint, keep up the good work!
    Think of it this way: GCC is faster now, but it will be far harder to make any significant long term performance enhancements, because its design is more or less set in stone. LLVM/CLANG will be significantly faster in a few years, and have better toolkit support to boot.

Posting Permissions

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