Thu Nov 23 16:36:19 EST 2017
I believe that Linux 2.4, however, is massively improved and reverses that
On 26 November 2001 10:36, Michael Aylor wrote:
> I can't site my sources (so don't hold me to this, this is just what
> I've heard), but I believe BSD performed very slightly better than Linux
> under high stress, but I've also heard that you can strip down linux to
> perform as well if you know what you're doing.
> My impression was that the performance difference between BSD and linux
> wasn't big enough to warrent a mass migration to BSD.
> Again, only what I've heard in the rumor mill....
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Olav Langeland [mailto:Olav.Langeland at ...2038...]
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 9:18 AM
> To: snort-users at lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: [Snort-users] Linux of FreeBSD
> I am seeking advice on what is best suited for Snort use, Linux or
> FreeBSD. It will monitor either a dual E3 link (currently at 50%
> capacity) or a single port producing about 30-40Mbit. Will Debian Linux
> handle this kind of traffic without problem, or is FreeBSD a better
> choice? The machine in question is P3-800, 512MB Ram and SCSI raid.
> Thanks for any help.
Casey Allen Shobe
cshobe at ...2198...
GCS/CM d+ s+:->+: a-- C++(++++) ULU++++$ P- L+++>++++ E- W++ N++ !o K- w-- !O
M V- PS++ PE Y+ PGP>++ t+ 5+ X R>+ tv-- b++ DI+ D---- G++ e h-(*) r--- z--
More information about the Snort-users