LFS Performance comparison

Nathan Coulson conathan at conet.dyndns.org
Sun Feb 8 10:35:32 PST 2004


> Guys,
>
> 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,
>
> Andrea

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 mailing list