freebsd stable - Aug 2016 - Benchmarks results for FreeBSD 11

Unfortunately people (customers, developers, hardward vendors) make
decisions on the basis of bang-for-buck.  FreeBSD is consistently
underperforming on benchmarks.  And regardless of real-world similarity,
the contrived benchmarks are the best that is used.

If clang (v3.4.1 on 10.3 Stable)  really is the cause, then there should be
an option to use "whatever" will let the source perform at its best
and
reflect the stability that we have with FreeBSD.

We can criticise the test results or the test regime, but unless
knowledgable people respond publicly and/or in the phoronix forums, such as
https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/software/distributions/891660-benchmarks-2-bsds-vs-7-linux-distributions
Then this interpretation of reality will be fixed in decision-makers' minds
and consequently the uptake (and support) of FreeBSD.

As I recall Michael's testing regime has been consistently criticised (by
FreeBSD folks) since he started his website, unfortunately when someone is
making public statements and comparisons we really need to have a
relationship with them to ensure that FreeBSD's best position is put
forward.

On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 09:57:24AM +1000, Dewayne Geraghty
wrote:
> unless knowledgable people respond publicly and/or in the phoronix
> forums [...] this interpretation of reality will be fixed in decision-
> makers' minds and consequently the uptake (and support) of FreeBSD.
IIRC this has been done before and hasn't really been productive.  OTOH
I don't recall the details.

FreeBSD hasn't had a benchmarking guru since Kris Kennaway retired from
working on FreeBSD.  It would be really nice if Someone(TM) took up the
position.

I would have to educate myself on the whole topic, so I'm not a likely
nominee.

mcl