LFS Performance comparison
conathan at conet.dyndns.org
Sun Feb 8 10:35:32 PST 2004
> Some time ago I've built a LFS 4.1 box that I use as an email security
> gateway. With the MyDoom outbreak we faced some performance issues
> (mainly due to MS Exchange NDRs) which we solved promptly, but I've also
> started analyzing the performances of my system.
> I'm no benchmarking guru, so I don't want to start a discussion on that.
> I'd just like to share some impressions/opinions. I used Unixbench 4.1.0
> compiled on a freshly installed LFS 4.1 and on a plain Debian (2.4
> kernel) installation (two identical boxes). Debian system is from 14% to
> 38% faster than LFS (except for the Pipe-based Context Switching test,
> which is 8% slower on Debian).
> My question is: do these figures make any sense? Working (hard?) on LFS
> optimization could lead to a two-digits performance improvements?
> TIA for any comments,
It was decided, that LFS would not attempt to optimize the system, so you
probably wont get positive feedback on this email.
More information about the blfs-support