Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 16:11:13 -0500 From: Dan <dan-freebsd-questions@ourbrains.org> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Disenchanted with ZFS; alternatives? Message-ID: <20081202211113.GA19886@ourbrains.org> In-Reply-To: <gh40l2$kuc$1@ger.gmane.org> References: <200812010959.15647.kirk@strauser.com> <gh1erh$n6s$1@ger.gmane.org> <4934E276.3050308@comcast.net> <9bbcef730812020120w539a8f14jc496b14c2fbd52ad@mail.gmail.com> <20081202110922.T14849@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20081202170805.GA20420@ourbrains.org> <20081202190351.Q16084@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <gh40l2$kuc$1@ger.gmane.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ivan Voras(ivoras@freebsd.org)@2008.12.02 20:00:46 +0100: > Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >> > >> It's already usable on DragonFly. DragonFLY itself is stable, but only > >> supports one CPUIt probably will never be ported to FreeBSD due to > >> API differences. > >=20 > > time to wait and see if they will really make dragonfly faster than > > FreeBSD (it's their goal)... >=20 > http://people.freebsd.org/~kris/scaling/dfly.html >=20 > Good luck to them, they need it :) >=20 That's a stupid benchmark. DragonFly doesn't have SMP support yet. As already mentioned, they don't have SMP yet. Scalable SMP is the ultimate goal though, and once they get rid of giant lock,=20 the SMP won't take that long.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20081202211113.GA19886>