From owner-freebsd-stable Sat Oct 7 7:34: 2 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from cmh-dial.columbus.rr.com (cmh-dial.columbus.rr.com [204.210.252.23]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82AE737B502 for ; Sat, 7 Oct 2000 07:33:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from columbus.rr.com (dhcp16466029.columbus.rr.com [24.164.66.29]) by cmh-dial.columbus.rr.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA15147 for ; Sat, 7 Oct 2000 10:33:02 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <39DF3587.3C2BA373@columbus.rr.com> Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 10:39:03 -0400 From: Bill Moran X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 4.1-STABLE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: FreeBSD Stable Subject: Re: `time make buildworld' References: <39DECC00.71E81EF1@urx.com> <20001007101732.A91198@freebie.demon.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Wilko Bulte wrote: > > > > So what's happening here? Softupdates slow down buildworld? 4.1.1 does > > > > buildworld slower than 3.5 and earlier? Or 4.1.1 buildworld takes a lot > > > > longer than earlier versions? Or my system is just weird? > Ah. In 8 meg it thrashes like h*ll, so all bets are off as far as a > reasonable build time. Just to add to this, I've done some very limited experiments with softupdates and my conclusion is that running softupdates on systems with low RAM is a very bad idea (tm) as it hurts performance badly. On systems with a more reasonable amount of RAM it's an improvement. I say limited tests because I haven't run the same machine with low/sufficient RAM to verify that it's the RAM that causes the slowdown, but it makes sense. -Bill To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message