From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 11 15:58:45 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1C0D16A47B for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2006 15:58:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from soralx@cydem.org) Received: from cydem.org (S0106000103ce4c9c.vc.shawcable.net [24.87.27.3]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8476E43CA9 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2006 15:57:26 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from soralx@cydem.org) Received: from freen0de (unknown [192.168.0.251]) by cydem.org (Postfix/FreeBSD) with ESMTP id 6309890BD9 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2006 07:58:44 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 07:58:39 -0800 From: To: Message-ID: <20061211075839.11bc0900@freen0de> In-Reply-To: <200612061805.05727.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <200612041443.15154.josh@tcbug.org> <200612061006.56852.jhb@freebsd.org> <20061206134536.0c775367@freen0de> <200612061805.05727.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.5.2 (GTK+ 2.10.6; i386-portbld-freebsd6.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Venting my frustration with FreeBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 15:58:46 -0000 > > > 512-way machine? Scaling on a 512-way machine is quite a > > > different ball of wax from scaling on 4-way, and scaling up to 32 > > > and 64 is going to be another ball of wax as well. > > can you give a few examples how scaling ability can be a function of > > the number of cores? seems like my curiosity exceeds my imagination > > today -- can't come up with any good reasons why this is true :) > > You may make different tradeoffs. For example, on a 4-cpu system, it > may be fine to have certain data structures shared across CPUs and > protected via a lock which avoids the overhead of multiple copies and > complexity of updating multiple copies of a data structure. However, > with a 512-way system you may have to resort to using duplicated > per-cpu (or maybe per-cpu group) copies of a structure because the > tradeoffs are different. Well, I see what you mean. However, as for this example, it should be possible to always share data between CPU groups (that can be sized dynamically), right? Thus, given an optimal dynamics algorithm, performance would always be close to best possible? More generally, it seems that some code may often be added to make the scaling ability more or less independent of the quantity of processing units. I still believe that an operating system that scales close to linearly is possible. The question is, how big an overhaul FreeBSD needs for a jump start to becoming of interest in the areas where performance & scalability matter? > -- > John Baldwin [SorAlx] ridin' VN1500-B2 From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 11 20:27:36 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB4A416A512 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2006 20:27:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jcw@highperformance.net) Received: from mx1.highperformance.net (dsl081-163-122.sea1.dsl.speakeasy.net [64.81.163.122]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85B814414B for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2006 19:59:33 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jcw@highperformance.net) Received: from [192.168.1.16] (w16.stradamotorsports.com [192.168.1.16]) by mx1.highperformance.net (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id kBBK07Lt075884; Mon, 11 Dec 2006 12:00:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jcw@highperformance.net) Message-ID: <457DB8CA.4070405@highperformance.net> Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 12:00:10 -0800 From: "Jason C. Wells" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (Windows/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: soralx@cydem.org References: <200612041443.15154.josh@tcbug.org> <200612061006.56852.jhb@freebsd.org> <20061206134536.0c775367@freen0de> <200612061805.05727.jhb@freebsd.org> <20061211075839.11bc0900@freen0de> In-Reply-To: <20061211075839.11bc0900@freen0de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=2.5 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on s4.stradamotorsports.com Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Venting my frustration with FreeBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 20:27:36 -0000 soralx@cydem.org wrote: > The question is, how big an overhaul FreeBSD needs for a > jump start to becoming of interest in the areas where performance & > scalability matter? > Easy! A dragonfly sized overhaul. :) Later, Jason C. Wells From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 15 14:31:34 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4DCE16A56C for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2006 14:31:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from janprunk@gmail.com) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.169]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0297243CA5 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2006 14:28:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from janprunk@gmail.com) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id o2so751865uge for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2006 06:29:58 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=lr0BNiIOp/TZVBilVsvs7awwIg2QabnODfVkY5WxLxz2goCAwh7myowqTvnv1+O5XO4vvWGGucHMj7Xt9HubBMho9qK6uK2s8Ihph3ff9/hYvwbBTfLUZ0XvOg0e3CHqNLAplHFHhkyTdjsqBrUr9ZJI+4JpFwMK/kCwraQIp7c= Received: by 10.48.210.16 with SMTP id i16mr2644769nfg.1166192997834; Fri, 15 Dec 2006 06:29:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.78.178.19 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Dec 2006 06:29:57 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 15:29:57 +0100 From: "Jan Prunk" To: misc@openbsd.org, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, debian-user@lists.debian.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Cc: Subject: Digital DEC VT-420 to give away X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 14:31:34 -0000 Hello ! Our company is doing a yearly cleanup. There are 4 Digital DEC VT-420 terminals for waste. The cleanup should happen sometime soon in the next few weeks. So if anyone would like to get one of them please contact me on my email, as I cannot store them for a long time, since I don't have enough space in my apartment. The terminals are in working condition, some of them even come with a keyboard. You could pick them up FREE of charge in Ljubljana, Slovenia, or I could ship them to you via POST, the charge is 40 Euros per shipment for the countries inside EU. Feel free to post this message to any other forums, where you think that people would be interested. But please if you would like to get any of the terminals, contact me on my email janprunk _at_ gmail _dot_ com as I don't monitor the mailing lists. Kind regards, Jan Prunk