[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Phoronix] Ubuntu 9.04 vs. Fedora 11 Performance



On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 17:25 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 07:55:56PM +1000, Eric Springer wrote:
> > I agree with the sentiment that phoronix reviews are lazy, poor, etc
> > -- but that doesn't mean nothing is revealed by them. Especially
> > considering how many people will use these benchmarks to make
> > conclusions about Fedora, we should make sure it presents as best as
> > it can. So I think it is important to establish why our apache
> > result were so poor and what can be done to fix it.
> 
> "Our" Apache results on the Phoronix tests, AIUI, are from an Apache
> they compiled, which is not what most people are going to use.
> There's also no mention of whether they mitigated the way results
> would have changed from our use of SELinux.

However, back a few posts, someone tested with the Fedora packaged
apache and reproduced the results - same result as Phoronix got, it was
slow. The current thread thinking is that audit is the cause of this.

-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]