From owner-freebsd-smp  Thu Jun 26 18:44:51 1997
Return-Path: <owner-smp>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA26220
          for smp-outgoing; Thu, 26 Jun 1997 18:44:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from chaos.amber.org (root@chaos.amber.org [205.231.232.12])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA26214
          for <freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu, 26 Jun 1997 18:44:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [205.231.232.197] (ab2-005.dial.nova.org [205.231.232.197]) by chaos.amber.org (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA00608; Thu, 26 Jun 1997 21:44:11 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199706270144.VAA00608@chaos.amber.org>
Subject: Re: New monster server
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 97 21:44:11 -0400
x-sender: petrilli@mx.amber.org
x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0, March 15, 1997
From: Christopher Petrilli <petrilli@amber.org>
To: "Mr M P Searle" <csubl@csv.warwick.ac.uk>, <cbrown@aracnet.com>
cc: <tege@pdc.kth.se>, <freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: owner-smp@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

I will only remind people involved in these discussions that processor 
performance is RARELY the bottleneck in a system, I/O almost always is.  
If it isn't I/O, you're not measuring correctly, and if you are, then 
it's memory.  

THrowing processors at a disk/IO intensive application will not help one 
bit, so until you're sure what the problem is, measure it :-)

Christopher Petrilli

--
| Christopher Petrilli                               "That's right you're
| petrilli@amber.org                                  not from Texas."