Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2012 20:30:30 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> To: "Samuel J. Greear" <sjg@evilcode.net> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Alie Tan <alie@affle.com> Subject: Re: DragonFly vs FreeBSD scheduler Message-ID: <5095E156.7000309@mu.org> In-Reply-To: <CANY-Wm_xkdVdyPi7xvfYAV%2B_YMWbyrgJnh2Q4V2s_7PiyjFxBw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CANuCnH9b20NxDpmzPdE2tdEFCTx7a4u_TvvEJNc0J4yCbDm%2Biw@mail.gmail.com> <509531DF.6050108@mu.org> <CANY-Wm_xkdVdyPi7xvfYAV%2B_YMWbyrgJnh2Q4V2s_7PiyjFxBw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11/3/12 7:02 PM, Samuel J. Greear wrote: >> Looks like a few specific benchmarks that DragonFly aimed to do well at that >> we were unawares of. >> > Unawares of? http://bsd.slashdot.org/story/08/03/06/1313218/freebsd-70-bests-linux-in-smp-performance > The FreeBSD project made hay with sysbench and pgbench not that long ago. > >> Not sure, didn't see DragonFly sharing the results with us until this paper >> was published although I may have missed that. >> > Is the DragonFly project under some obligation to share its results > with the FreeBSD developers? My takeaway is that this conversation is dumb. -Alfred
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5095E156.7000309>