Facebook Seeks Devs To Make Linux Network Stack As Good As FreeBSD's 195
An anonymous reader writes Facebook posted a career application which, in their own words is 'seeking a Linux Kernel Software Engineer to join our Kernel team, with a primary focus on the networking subsystem. Our goal over the next few years is for the Linux kernel network stack to rival or exceed that of FreeBSD.' Two interesting bullet points listing "responsibilities": Improve IPv6 support in the kernel, and eliminate perf and stability issues. FB is one of the worlds largest IPv6 deployments; Investigate and participate in emerging protocols (MPTCP, QUIC, etc) discussions,implementation, experimentation, tooling, etc.
This does pose the question: (Score:1, Insightful)
Why not use FreeBSD? It's already there and at least as good as linux. Or have they perhaps hung themselves on systemd?
Re:This does pose the question: (Score:5, Informative)
I love FreeBSD, I support them financially every year, and I use it daily but it is not uniformly better than Linux. Hardware support, in particular, is very far behind. Two random examples:
1- My NAS system does not recognise any USB storage when they are plugged in after boot (no hotplug). It does not support USB superspeed (USB 3.0) either (I have to boot in compatibility mode by disabling xHCI in the BIOS). This is a known issue with some Asus motherboards, still unfixed in 10.0
2- FreeBSD does not install on some of my HP G6 servers. The kernel simply segfaults. I really wanted FreeBSD on this hardware, so I run it in a VM under Linux (using KVM). Has been running brilliantly for about 2 years now.
Also security update in FreeBSD are really difficult. I haven't finished dealing with updating my ports since I moved from 9.2 to 9.3 last week.
I have to say this though: when it runs, it runs really well.
Re:This does pose the question: (Score:4, Interesting)
USB3 support in FreeBSD 10 is OK (bunch of external disks used for PC backup - speed was essential). No problem with hot-plug either. Ports upgrade is trivial (although I have switched to pkg-ng now). I really can't find why do you think that security updates are difficult either. I've got only one 9.2 system around which I at the moment am not bothered to upgrade.
Why not rebuild your ports? (Score:2)
And why would it be such a bad thing, even if you had to? I maintain a handful of ports myself and people's complaining about rebuilding them always irks me — what am I missing?
There are, of course, precompiled binary packages for almost all the ports (where licensing allows redistribution of such binaries). But I don't use them myself — building everything from source. Why not?
Re:Why not rebuild your ports? (Score:5, Informative)
If you are managing a bunch (more than 2) FreeBSD machines building ports on the live system is wrong and counterproductive. In this kind of scenario you really should setup a package building machine and distribute your own binary packages to them. With pkgng this really works well.
This applies if you don't want to use the official binary packages (for example because you need different options from the defaults, or you tweak some ports)
Re: (Score:2)
What asus board? I've got an asus crosshair iv formula and the usb3 has been working fine in both 9.2 and 9.3. The aibs driver doesn't support this board yet though.
as for security updates:
freebsd-update fetch; freebsd-update install
and port updates:
portsnap fetch update; portmaster -gda
So not sure what the issues are here.
Re:This does pose the question: (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:This does pose the question: (Score:5, Informative)
If you have 1 million Linux machines deployed, with full Linux-specific software stacks on each, it's cheaper and easier (and most likely faster) to fix the problems you see in Linux than to move the fleet to a new OS.
Facebook's dev shop culture is all about banging out code as fast as possible for the problem in front of them, then moving on. Forward planning isn't really the thing there, from what I hear (though I think you're no longer discouraged from testing your code before it goes live, that's a recent change). Moving to BSD might well be a better long term plan, but it would take years to get there and they don't really think on that timescale, from the rumors I hear anyhow.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, I only know this stuff second hand, but Facebook's dev motto used to be "go fast and break stuff". They had a very hard time hiring senior devs for some reason. Recently, they've had a bit of a (recruiting world) push to let people know that their new motto is "go fast with stable infra". I hear there used to be a banner on the wall proclaiming "don't test, just ship", but to be fair I haven't seen that myself.
Re: (Score:3)
I interviewed there, and there and had a dude with under a year of experience out of college interview me. and of course, give a horrible interview. I'm pretty sure that's the reason I didn't get the offer (of course who knows, maybe other reasons). they have this idea that an engineer is an engineer, which I think is good. to an extent, but in the end it's a bullshit philosophy.
Re: (Score:3)
Two comments:
1. Their internal motto was, in fact, "go fast and break stuff"; I know this first-hand because I talked with them about that at my interview back in February, where they mentioned that they've changed to "go fast and be bold" because, in fact, they were trying to lower incidents of availability hits;
2. 20+ years of tech industry experience here, and I was totally ready to be interviewed by some snot-nosed kid. What I got instead was an interview panel whose average tech industry tenure was ar
Re: (Score:2)
You think you are making facebook look like idiots
No, he's making them look smart. 30 years in the software business has taught me that being first is a lot more important than being best. Successful companies whip up a quick fix and push it out the door, while the losers are busy doing another round of code review and testing. More rigorous engineering may be better in the long run, but there is no long run if you are bankrupt because you missed your opportunity window.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:This does pose the question: (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't you think it's easier and cheaper to optimize the network stack of Linux rather than writing tons of hardware drivers for FreeBSD? Hardware which, most of the time, will be undocumented. Furthermore, when you change your servers, yay, more drivers to write...
Re: (Score:3)
Facebook buys custom servers, so will be 100% documented. Also they are of the vanity free variety lacking any bolted on bits added strictly to make the numbered list of features on the side of the box longer. I suspect that the only thing they are going to care about are disks and nics. Sounds cards, video cards, random USB hardware, bluetooth, none of that matters to them at all. These are datacenter housed pieces of equipment.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't there a cart and horse misalignment here. If you're a hardware vendor looking to get a big (and FB are big buyers of hardware) contract, and the tendering terms include "must have drivers for [Open Source system]", then won't you look at what you've already got on the shelf in terms of capabilities, and
Re: (Score:2)
ASICs generally aren't flexible enough that you could simply emulate another controller in firmware, while FPGAs suck too much power to use on commodity network adapters. Writing a new driver (or bringing an existing neglected driver up to scratch) is going to be quicker than trying to make hardware that's compatible enough to work with a driver written for another vendor's controller.
(Besides which, as that other driver is probably maintained by your competitor, do you really think they're going to make an
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, they may be self contained (which is not true because NIC drivers interact directly with the network stack for example) and small, but they are also highly untestable and undocumented.
What I see is a stack to fix and a continuous stream of drivers to write. The one shot operation is bound to be cheaper on the long term.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:This does pose the question: (Score:5, Interesting)
pkgng's made port upgrading much less burdensome - even fairly complex dependency changes can be handled automatically as of 1.3, and the official package repositories are a lot more useful now. They even have stable security-fix-only branches.
I still make my own customised builds, but I make binary packages in an isolated jail using poudriere. 99% of upgrades are a matter of updating its ports tree, running rebuild-packages, and running pkg upgrade on all my machines.
You couldn't pay me to go back to portupgrade/portmaster/portmanager.
Re: (Score:2)
I used to run a lot of freebsd at home - until I tried linux for samba and never went back to bsd again. bsd samba simply sucks. its dog slow and it hammers on disks, unlike linux which is very cache-oriented (from just looking at the drive lights).
that was my main complaint. maybe linux has better integration with smb and the network stack but bsd is just not nearly as fast.
stability wise, this isn't 10 yrs ago and linux stays up as long as you need it (years, even).
bsd has better mgmt, though; one dist
Re: (Score:2)
Did you try disabling anything and everything (drivers) in the kernel? Or perhaps just blacklisting most/all the modules?
OpenBSD makes this easier with UKC and "config -e".
Re: (Score:2)
The binary package manager is a pain in the ass in FreeBSD/quote. Have you used FreeBSD since the package infrastructure was replaced? If so, we'd be interested in bug reports that are more detailed than 'it's a pain in the ass'.
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly curious, not trying to troll. In my ESXi tests I can manage more than double the throughput on a Linux VM compared to a BSD VM. Is there just crappy paravirtual NIC support in BSD?
Tests were done with IPFIre and pfSense on two different ESXi boxes, and going to virtual client/server on etiher end of the router to avoid gigabit wire speed limits. On my slower box, i got 6xxMB/s with pfsense and 2.xxGB/s with IPFire. Minimal
Why not just use FreeBSD then? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
If they've done a lot of work already on a custom kernel, it may not make sense to try porting all that work to completely different kernel architecture. They may have done a cost benefit analysis and decided that the cost of improving their current architecture is less than retrofitting FreeBSD. Not saying this is the case, just posing a possible scenario where this would be the better option.
Re:Why not just use FreeBSD then? (Score:5, Funny)
It might be a silly question, but why don't they just use FreeBSD in that case?
You haven't heard? I'm sorry... My condolences, but the writing had been on the wall for a while though. Netcraft even confirmed it years ago...
*BSD is dying.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't Netcraft dead?
Because people have been saying the BSDs are dying for night on 20 years now, possibly longer.
Re: (Score:2)
Gee, Apple has been dying *far* longer than that . . . :)
hawk
Re: (Score:2)
Ye gods I'm so tired of this 'joke' cropping up every so often. It wasn't really that funny 12 years ago, either.
Re: (Score:3)
Ye gods I'm so tired of this 'joke' cropping up every so often. It wasn't really that funny 12 years ago, either.
Actually,
i still find the dying remark funny.
And the more time has passed, the funnier it gets. As still being around and still being a relevant OS proves how silly the study was at the time.
So i hope we can still laugh about it in 30 years or so.
Re: (Score:2)
You know, anybody who knows that joke now ... in 30 years or so will be sitting in the old geeks home laughing into their beard for reasons nobody else understands.
And, yes, I consider myself among them ... now, if you'll excuse me, I should get started on my beard.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
May be multiple issues. Perhaps better OpenMP support ? maybe NUMA ? Maybe Linux has a better virtual machine infrastructure ? maybe hardware support.
LOL, so why not use theirs? (Score:5, Insightful)
Look, this is FreeBSD ... why not just take their damned code?
It's not like you're not allowed to do that. That's what is great about the BSD license.
If FreeBSD's network stack is what you aspire to, why reinvent the wheel?
Re:LOL, so why not use theirs? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can't just copy/paste code and expect it to work
Yes you can. You'll be disappointed, but you can.
Remember Microsoft Windows? (Score:2)
It used the FreeBSD networking code. This doesn't mean windows is fast and it's sort of specious. BSD has tricks in the Kernel to make I/O faster that pretty much anything else.
Re: (Score:3)
It used the FreeBSD networking code. This doesn't mean windows is fast and it's sort of specious. BSD has tricks in the Kernel to make I/O faster that pretty much anything else.
No it didn't. A few utilities that nobody used (e.g., the commandline ftp.exe, which doesn't even support PASV mode) were ported from BSD (not even FreeBSD), but the TCP/IP stack in Windows was not from BSD.
Re: (Score:3)
Windows NT used a STREAMS-based networking stack, culled from some other UNIX (not directly, but using the concepts and frameworks), not a BSD-derived networking stack.
I have no idea how the DOS-based Windows networking stack developed. But it wasn't pulled from any BSD.
A few command-line utilities (ftp.exe is the most common cited one) were pulled from BSD sources, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Coal to gas conversion is pretty easy (though the result won't be as efficient as a combined cycle plant desgined to run on GAS). You just have to add some gas jets and gas piping to the combustion chamber. The design of the boiler and it's operating pressure can stay much the same and any extra physical space requirements are minimal.
That doesn't mean coal to other things will be anywhere near as easy even if the fundamental "boiling water drives steam tubine" bit remains. You have to think of the physical
Re: (Score:2)
It's the almost bit that will get you unstuck. No doubt the BSD network code could be dropped into Linux, but making it all work still wouldn't be trivial.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
there is a lot of bsd code in the linux kernel bsd is probably the least restrictive license so basically bsd code can be used by anyone for any reason
Re: (Score:2)
Like Apple... meet OSX
Re: (Score:2)
Re:LOL, so why not use theirs? (Score:4, Insightful)
Been years since I read the license, but the BSD licenses are pretty permissive, to the extent you can take BSD stuff and use it as a basis for commercial products.
BSD has always been about writing awesome code, and letting people do what they want with it, as opposed to imposing ideology on people.
I'd be surprised if Linux doesn't already have code from FreeBSD in it.
Re: (Score:2)
It does. Lots.
Re:LOL, so why not use theirs? (Score:4)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
IANAL.
Sort of. Technically, as you are (presumably) not the copyright holder of the work, you would have no permission to grant any sort of copyright license to third parties.
But the license used by FreeBSD is very permissive. Anyone is permitted to copy, modify, redistribute, or redistribute modified versions of the software and essentially the only requirement is that you also include the three parts of the license text, ver
Re: (Score:2)
You don't have to modify the code. You can take a BSD-licensed piece of code and just slap it into a GPLed program. It is then subject to the requirements of both licenses, and (as long as we're not dealing with the BSD advertising clause) since they're compatible there's no problem. Of course, the original is still available under the BSD license, and you do have to leave that license in even if you change it.
Non-trivial modifications to the source (and "trivial" really does mean trivial here - if th
Re: (Score:2)
Biggest troll on Slashdot ever (Score:2)
Insulting their work might not be the right way to get the best Linux kernel network engineers to join your company.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Insulting their work might not be the right way to get the best Linux kernel network engineers to join your company.
Or it might be the best way ever. Linux people and their egos....
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As a programmer, project manager and substantial shareholder in my own company, I'm always grateful when people point out things I do that could be done better.
If I was just the former and not the latter two, I think the relative importance of my ego and the quality of the product would be shifted somewhat.
Most, Open Source programmers tend to value recognition pretty highly relative to absolute merit of the product. To your average guy, if you say "your project sucks, we'll pay you to fix it" means that yo
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, but Facebook. Somewhere between working for the SS and Big Tobacco.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but Facebook. Somewhere between working for the SS and Big Tobacco.
So snappy uniforms and very, very, deep pockets?
Re: (Score:2)
Yar, but you don't see the immediate effects of guilt and shame rotting their souls away; slowly turning them into twisted husks of matted neckbeard.
I'd imagine being at Facebook would increase the rapidity of that process a thousand fold.
FreeBSD network stack (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:FreeBSD network stack (Score:5, Funny)
Way more cowbell, and a much cooler logo.
Re: (Score:1)
FBSD essentially always wins who has the fastest network stack contests, sets internet speed records etc.
it just is always has been slightly a head.
There is a reason why juniper uses it to base junos on
Re:FreeBSD network stack (Score:5, Informative)
As someone who has used various BSD's and Linux in large scale environments, and is a fan of both, I've configured servers with multi-10Gb interfaces and handling 100k+ requests a second I honestly can't think of any example of where Linux has been inferior. The often repeated line that FreeBSD has a better networking stack was probably true over 10 years ago with Linux 2.2 and earlier, but since then I'd say that myth is just bullcrap.
Maybe Facebook are talking about some specific IPv6 or cutting edge features like MPTCP they need on their network, but as a general statement it's utterly misleading.
Re:FreeBSD network stack (Score:4, Informative)
The MPTCP stack for Linux isn't in mainline, but is much further ahead then the FreeBSD version (not sure if it that in mainline).
Re:FreeBSD network stack (Score:5, Informative)
Then there's the whole thing about most network stack research happening primarily on FreeBSD because of licensing. There's a new zero-copy network API that was developed in FreeBSD that allows line rate 64byte 10gb traffic on a 450mhz quadcore cpu. Linux and old-api FreeBSD were about 1/10th the packets-per-second.
A new thread friendly socket API has just been pushed to FreeBSD 11. One of Netflix' engineers had a pet project that now allows near zero lock-contention thread scaling. He was able to done line speed 40gb/s with 150k TCP sessions. Instead of having one file descriptor with a single listening thread, you instead have one file-descriptor and listening thread per MSS queue from the NIC and you can lock your thread to the same CPU as the MSS queue, so the packet is already in L2 cache. No shared network state. This also means no share locks with nearly perfect linear scaling and virtually no cache trashing or bouncing.
They're starting work for extend the API to also allow the OS to better handle NUMA and to attach the MSS queues to the CPU to which the NIC is attached. This will virtually remove all cross-talk among the CPU cores trying to handle the network state.
They're looking into expanding this same concept to the Storage IO system.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
[citation needed]
I really want to believe you are sincere and everything you say is true. Unfortunately, you don't seem to have provided any references.
This is the Web. Hyperlinks exist for a reason. Use them.
Re:FreeBSD network stack (Score:4, Informative)
Google searches for "netmap" and "FreeBSD" will give you lots of information on pushing millions of pps through 900 MHz single-core machines. Netmap is also available on Linux. There's even a netmap-enabled version of IPFW that allows you to do packet filtering and routing completely in userspace, again will millions of pps. IPFW is also available on Linux, although I don't know if the netmap-enabled version is.
Google searches for "openconnect" and "FreeBSD" will give you lots of information and blog posts from the Netflix guys about why they picked FreeBSD, and how it all works, including details on the networking.
Google searches for "Adrian Chadd", or "RSS scaling", or similar terms will show you threads and posts on various FreeBSD mailing lists with information detailing a lot of the MSS/RSS work that's going into FreeBSD 11, and several projects that build off that. Those also have links to other information around sockets and similar.
Google searches for "NUMA" and "FreeBSD" will bring up mailing list threads that cover the different projects being undertaken to improve the CPU affinity and thread locality and all that jazz.
Sure, it would be nice if the OP had posted links to the info, but it's not like the information is secret or hard to find.
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
Sorry, but no. The onus is on you — one making the claim — to offer links supporting it.
You Google it, you pick the links you deem most suitable, you embed them in your posting.
Making the reader do it is not only impolite, it also makes it easier to attack your argument (that FreeBSD is superior) — the Google search could very well offer a link to some blog saying "FreeBSD networking sucks"...
Re: (Score:2)
What makes you believe OP was "making an argument"? He was responding to a comment that asked for more details, and he has provided them. If you want to argue with him, go ahead, but then you'll be the one making the claim that he's wrong (or whatever it is you want to argue about).
Linking to evidence (Re:FreeBSD network stack) (Score:2)
My objection was not to merits or lack thereof of a particular OS, but to the practice of placing the burden of research on the audience (and opponents).
Whatever it is you are stating, should be backed by evidence. It is best to include the links with the statement being supported, but it can be tedious. So, links should be provided upon request — without any lip like "just google it yourself"...
Re: (Score:2)
That's a useful list, especially if you have no clue as to what to actually search for. Like me.
Cheers.
Re: (Score:2)
Netmap is also available on Linux
While this is technically true, we recently had a PhD student try this. First, the Linux version is only available as patches so it took him a while to find a version of Linux that they'd apply against. Once he'd done this, it turns out that the driver support is basically only there in Linux for Intel NICs, which are modified as part of the patch. In FreeBSD, because it's merged into trunk, most NIC drivers support it.
Oh, and Adrian isn't at Netflix anymore, but he's still working on networking stuff
Re: (Score:2)
I don't work at a CDN company. :-)
I work at norse-corp.com. RSS is a non-paid thing I do at home.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I'm really getting tired of people like you: This is not a scientific publication, and this is not for sure wikipedia, this is a forum where people expose opinions. Want citations? Go back to the fucking Wikipedia and please DO verify some of the already present sources on many articles there (I grew tired of pointing out the ones that didn't even mention what they're supposed to support). Otherwise use a search engine, the beauty of the 2000's is that you no longer need to spend hours searching for informa
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, that's too bad. I was genuinely curious about the work being done.
Sorry if I sounded a bit gruff, but when I see categorical statements, I like to have references to check myself.
Re: (Score:2)
Me - adrian@freebsd.org. Also, https://wiki.freebsd.org/Netwo... [freebsd.org] .
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Hi! adri here. I'm Adrian (adrian@freebsd.org) the ex-Netflix engineer who was doing this as his project whilst I was working there.
I'm continuing to do it in my spare time now, as time and hardware permit.
https://wiki.freebsd.org/NetworkRSS
I'm working out the kinks in how IP fragments are correctly handled. It'll be more useful for real world deployments after that - unfortunately in the real world you have to deal with fragmented TCP and UDP; you can't just pretend it's not there.
I'll continue chipping aw
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hi,
That'd be me (adrian@freebsd.org)
https://wiki.freebsd.org/Netwo... [freebsd.org]
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Red demon costumes vs. penguin costumes. No contest really.
http://freebsd-image-gallery.n... [netcode.pl]
http://freebsd-image-gallery.n... [netcode.pl]
http://www.flickr.com/photos/1... [flickr.com]
http://www.flickr.com/photos/1... [flickr.com]
Corporate Contributions to OSS (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't understand why there's all these comments saying they should just use FreeBSD. There are many reasons to despise Facebook but their desire to improve the Linux networking stack is admirable. We should be encouraging corporations to contribute to OSS, not telling them to just use that other thing that is better in some ways but not others. Kudos to them for contributing back to the projects they use.
Re: (Score:3)
The job posting specifically says they prefer to have the code in mainline.
High perf SMP coding is in a category of its own (Score:5, Informative)
Designing algorithms that play well in a SMP environment under heavy loads is not easy. It isn't just a matter of locking within the protocol stack... contention between cpus can get completely out of control even from small 6-instruction locking windows. And it isn't just the TCP stack which needs be contention-free. The *entire* packet path from the hardware all the way through to the system calls made by userland have to be contention-free. Plus the scheduler has to be able to optimize the data flow to reduce unnecessary cache mastership changes.
It's fun, but so many kernel subsystems are involved that it takes a very long time to get it right. And there are only a handful of kernel programmers in the entire world capable of doing it.
-Matt
It's not just NetMap that brings performance ... (Score:3, Informative)
FreeBSD also includes an alternative to select/poll called kqueue that allows it to scale client connections massively with minimal performance degradation. Linux introduced epoll as a work-alike, but it has some drawbacks ...
http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/~sangjin/2012/12/21/epoll-vs-kqueue.html
What's a massive scale? WhatsApp, recently acquired by Facebook, uses FreeBSD and Erlang to power it's service offerings. They sustain over 2 million simultaneous client connections per FreeBSD server ...
http://blog.whatsapp.com/196/1-million-is-so-2011
I wouldn't be surprised if the internal comparison between Linux and FreeBSD network features/performance was fueled by feedback from their new subsidiary.
FreeBSD also works very closely with the Nginx community. If you look at the dev mailing list, you will see a fair amount of kernel level dev work sponsored by companies that use nginx on top of FreeBSD. This constant tuning keeps nginx consumers loyal to FreeBSD for obvious reasons. There is no wonder why this combination was selected by NetFlix to power their new content delivery network.
Re: (Score:3)
Huh? (Score:2)
What effect does the userland have on the TCP/IP stack?
Won't Happen (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Except when you start talking about netmap. :) That's a userspace network stack that can push millions of pps, on sub-GHz systems.
There's even a netmap-enabled version of the IPFW packet filter that runs in userspace, filtering millions of pps on sub-GHz systems.
And there's an applications ecosystem starting to grow around netmap that keeps all network-related packet processing in userspace.
As a twist, netmap and IPFW are also available on Linux, and provide better performance than the in-kernel network st
Re:Won't Happen (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, that's not always true. FreeBSD ships with netmap, which allows you to talk to the network hardware directly from userspace. A significant chunk of the DNS root zone is served by FreeBSD boxes using a completely custom TCP/IP stack on top of netmap. There's a paper at this year's SIGCOMM about building specialised network stacks in this infrastructure.
If you're talking about the FreeBSD TCP/IP stack, then libuinet [wanproxy.org] allows running it entirely in userspace.
These might not be the ones that Facebook is interested in, but a significant amount of their workload could be sped up by using the work described in the SIGCOMM paper...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I remember seeing at some point numbers. It didn't impress in a single thread, but could easily saturate a 10Gb link in multi-threaded tests. They tested an FTP server on a T2plus. Regarding cores, we have anything from dual UltraSPARC IIIi to T4 based systems including some M-class. I believe the T3-4 has the highest number of cores. It should be 64 cores and 512 threads, but a single Solaris instance can only see 256. I believe that the M9000 and M9000-64 should have the same problem, but the biggest M se
Re: (Score:2)
wrong response, you should be hating Linux slightly more. Great for desktops, but for servers for the common stacks BSD is usually better