From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 14 15:38:14 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9015416A403 for ; Sat, 14 Oct 2006 15:38:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from drechsau@Geeks.ORG) Received: from mail.geeks.org (jacobs.Geeks.ORG [204.153.247.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49D8B43D5E for ; Sat, 14 Oct 2006 15:38:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from drechsau@Geeks.ORG) Received: by mail.geeks.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4FF7D159065; Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:38:13 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:38:13 -0500 From: Mike Horwath To: NOC Prowip Message-ID: <20061014153813.GC72440@Geeks.ORG> Mail-Followup-To: NOC Prowip , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org References: <20061014130331.68863.qmail@web33312.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <200610141113.25155.tec@mega.net.br> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200610141113.25155.tec@mega.net.br> X-PGP-Fingerprint: D8 24 CC E6 47 5F E4 60 BF B7 6E FA BF C7 6E C5 X-GPG-Fingerprint: 6A89 E78A B8B1 69D9 8CDB E966 4A5A C3F9 A1B0 C381 User-Agent: mutt-ng/devel-r804 (FreeBSD) Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Performance 4.x vs. 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2006 15:38:14 -0000 On Sat, Oct 14, 2006 at 11:13:24AM -0300, NOC Prowip wrote: > Hi, I am hooking in here without any intention to fire things up but > isn 't this discussion certainly useless? Not only 4.11 is gone but > also i386 is practically marked to die out as well as UP systems > are. Wow, I hope not. Unless you are separating out i386/i486 and such. Many people refer to i386 as all 32bit x86 systems. > All platforms are going to be 64bits and memory of 4GB or more is > not so rare anymore. Allmost all AM2 MBs support already 16MB. Even > most professionals are not using SCSI anymore but Sata-II. I disagree. SATA (of any gen) still does not perform like SCSI. Let's just look at spindle speed alone ignoring the other benefits of SCSI. Now, I am not a lover of 32bit either, all of my new systems are amd64 (either Opteron or EM64T systems). -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau@Geeks.ORG