An Unencrypted Look at FileVault
Subject:   FileVault performance tax
Date:   2003-12-26 21:19:45
From:   anonymous2
Response to: FileVault performance tax

I can't comment on NT but the original CMU and OSF Mach are ukernels, Apple xnu is not in the true sense. The FreeBSD "server" is not a real Mach server but bolts directly onto Apple's own variant of Mach so there is really no major slowdown there. Nevertheless, there is some overhead with making BSD system calls. Depending on what you want to do, task_self() might be more appropriate than getpid(). I'm also not sure how you actually timed the system calls. FYI, there are no release-quality kernels that will leave you with a working G5 Linux system, there is no accelerated OpenGL on NVIDIA cards and ppc64 64-bit Linux is not in any sense standard in kernel 2.6. Linux probably makes a poor choice if you want to do anything serious on your (Apple) ppc. As for the TLB overhead etc. pick up a good book on computer architecture and the ppc user manuals: the code for managing the TLB is very standard (read: same) across any operating system that will run on the ppc.
Main Topics Oldest First

Showing messages 1 through 2 of 2.

  • FileVault performance tax
    2004-09-29 17:52:42  rhigginbo [View]

    Interesting Link:
  • FileVault performance tax
    2004-09-29 17:48:11  rhigginbo [View]

    Industry research shows that most of the performance difference related to Linux and OSX are impacted mostly by HFS+ performance and TCP/IP throughput. Gnosis Software (a Linux-oriented company) has performed Linux benchmarks which detail the primary differences in performance.

    (Not sure what release of OSX or which version [server or client] was used. But, this benchmark is a good point for discussion.)