> You're ignoring the mail I got in private, and quite some of which were
> written in the same tone of voice that your initial posting was in.

Well, if it was in the same tone as my initial posting, there should be no problem. I merely, in a 
polite way, pointed out that (performance != microbenchmark) which is correct. I pasted that email 
below, so anyone could see there is nothing wrong with it. Hence, I am sure everyone was on the 
ball.

> You're apparently also ignoring the discussion that arose on slashdot.
> I cannot tell what happened on the freebsd-performance list (which I was
> told to spam, BTW), as I'm not on the list.

You were to told to spam freebsd-performance. By whom? If someone told you to kill FreeBSD core, 
would that be an excuse?

I did not read slashdot. I am not even subscribed to NetBSD lists, but I look through kernel 
related traffic for ideas.

> That said, I think an apology is in order from your side.

Apology for what exactly? Is anything that I have written so far inaccurate?

How about we continue this in private? Frank asked to discontinue this thread I think it relates to 
both of us.

PS If you were not the one who started thread on FreeBSD, why did you not tell anyone that someone 
impersonated you? People (including myself) have written you. The email address work (as we know 
now). In fact there are other reasons for me to believe you were not impersonated, but I believe 
it's beyond the scope of this thread. Obviously, it's not totally impossible. If you started that 
thread, then it's irrelevant whether you are subscribed or not. You said many FreeBSD people told 
you benchmarks are useless. You did not mention up until now that ALL of these many people were 
afraid to post to a public mailing list. Otherwise, they have been naturally told. Microbenchmarks 
are NOT useless. They benchmark performance of some aspect of a system. That's why people run them. 
However, we can hardly accept that these misterious cowards represent FreeBSD community.
PPS That was rather large post-scriptum


---------------------------------------
Hubert,
The benchmark suite in question is not bad, but it's a microbenchmark suite.
BTW, when we used the suite to tune kernel for ourt needs we had to change many things.
As of a year ago some tests had to be modified, otherwise we might start tuning for the wrong 
goals. The title of this email and the article is NetBSD beats FreeBSD in performance should be 
changed to NetBSD beats FreeBSD on comprehensive microbenchmark suite. I don't remember who it was, 
but someone posted results of real server tests. These were in favor of FreeBSD. I doubt that much 
changed since last  year but who knows ... Maybe NetBSD is better, but this is not something that 
could be concluded from a microbenchmark.
IMHO.
igor.



;-----Original Message-----
From: Hubert Feyrer <hubert at feyrer.de>
To: freebsd-performance at FreeBSD.org, freebsd-advocacy at FreeBSD.org
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 02:19:37 +0100 (CET)
Subject: Benchmark: NetBSD 2.0 beats FreeBSD 5.3 in server performance

> Gregory McGarry asked me to host and advertize this paper for him:
>
> Abstract: ``With the recent releases of NetBSD 2.0 and FreeBSD 5.3 operating
> system, many new and exciting features have been implemented. Both criticism
> and commendation on performance, reliability and scalability have been directed
> towards these releases.
>
> This paper presents a suite of benchmarks and results for comparing the
> performance of these operating systems. The benchmarks target core operating
> system functionality, server scalability and thread implementation. These
> benchmarks are useful server-based criteria for demanding applications such as
> loaded webservers, databases, and voice-over-IP (VoIP) media relays. The
> results indicate that NetBSD has surpassed FreeBSD in performance on nearly
> every benchmark and is poised to grab the title of the best operating system
> for the server environment.''
>
> URL: http://www.feyrer.de/NetBSD/gmcgarry/
>
>
>   - Hubert
>
> --
> NetBSD - Free AND Open!      (And of course secure, portable, yadda yadda)