Gentoo Archives: gentoo-performance

From: Guillaume Ceccarelli <lastrainson@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-performance@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-performance] performance testing
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 09:37:47
Message-Id: 5116e190704290234v2b1eb429o12ddd7aba62b24fd@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-performance] performance testing by Daniel Armyr
1 I have to agree with Daniel here. This list is very low traffic. If you want
2 to reach a broad part of the gentoo community, I think the Gentoo forums
3 could be the way to go. ( http://forums.gentoo.org ). As for the performance
4 tests, I don't think either that the server world would give you a lot of
5 differences in terms of performance whether you're using Gentoo or a popular
6 server-oriented binary distro.
7
8 Just my 2 cents...
9
10 On 4/29/07, Daniel Armyr <daniel.armyr@××××.se> wrote:
11 >
12 > > Quite frankly, I'd be surprised if a Gentoo server was significantly
13 > > faster than a CentOS 5 (RHEL 5 clone) server on a high-intensity
14 > > server workload. But I have tried a lot of distros for scientific
15 > > workstations, and Gentoo does seem to have an advantage there.
16 >
17 > I would have to agree. The performance gains in Gentoo tend to (In the
18 > Real World(tm) ) come from not having a bunch of crap instaled an
19 > running that hogs memory rather than from using a particular set of
20 > optimizing flags. Further, real-word servers ten to be built with some
21 > performance margin in order to handle load spikes, so a few percent
22 > here and there wouldn't really be measurable, assuming you compare to a
23 > system that isn't bloated.
24 >
25 > Further,this list has averaged at about one post per month since around
26 > 2003 when I joined, so don't expect to gett too many replies from here.
27 >
28 > --DA
29 >
30 >

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-performance] performance testing Francisco Rivas <taken2k4@×××××.com>