Contributed by jose on from the read-this-very-closely dept.
Possibly biased against OpenBSD in style, but not fact...
The important quote is
"OpenBSD 3.4 was a real stinker in these tests. The installation routine sucks, the disk performance sucks, the kernel was unstable, and in the network scalability department it was even outperformed by it's father, NetBSD. OpenBSD also gets points deducted for the sabotage they did to their IPv6 stack. If you are using OpenBSD, you should move away now. "
Folks, read these results very closely and very critically. Performance testing is, in fact, considerably more scientific than this page makes it seem (graphs don't make it scientific, the approach is what matters). Note the following:
- the installation routine is a matter of personal preference. the 1024 cylinder limit can be gotten around using GRUB, for example.
- the kernel stability comment comes from a crash in one test, which doesn't indicate overall stability. (Though I have crashed several of my own systems with too many processes.)
- the IPv6 stack comment has little, if any, foundation in this report.
(Comments are closed)