From owner-freebsd-current Tue Apr 17 1: 8:35 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from dt051n37.san.rr.com (dt051n37.san.rr.com [204.210.32.55]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D54C337B424 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 01:08:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from DougB@DougBarton.net) Received: from DougBarton.net (master [10.0.0.2]) by dt051n37.san.rr.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA66833; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 01:08:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from DougB@DougBarton.net) Message-ID: <3ADBF9FA.9D1C4DB4@DougBarton.net> Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 01:08:26 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: Triborough Bridge & Tunnel Authority X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.3-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matt Dillon Cc: "Justin T. Gibbs" , "'current@freebsd.org'" Subject: Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost References: <200104161634.f3GGYZs11356@aslan.scsiguy.com> <200104162146.f3GLkGT82369@earth.backplane.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Matt Dillon wrote: > It is not implying that at all. There is no black and white here. > This is a case where spending a huge amount of time and complexity > to get the efficiency down to the Nth degree is nothing but a waste > of time. What matters is what the user sees, what performance > the application gets, and how many bugs you introduce when optimizing > something that might not need optimizing. Sooo..... sounds like making "on" the default in -current is a worthy experiment? Doug -- Perhaps the greatest damage the American system of education has done to its children is to teach them that their opinions are relevant simply because they are their opinions. Do YOU Yahoo!? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message