From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu Apr 17 15:31:15 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA10990
          for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 15:31:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from etinc.com (et-gw-fr1.etinc.com [204.141.244.98])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA10975
          for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 15:31:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ntws (ntws.etinc.com [204.141.95.142]) by etinc.com (8.8.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id SAA29410; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 18:38:23 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970417182959.00b2e9c0@etinc.com>
X-Sender: dennis@etinc.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32)
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 18:30:02 -0400
To: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>,
        Alfred Perlstein <perlsta@fang.cs.sunyit.edu>
From: dennis <dennis@etinc.com>
Subject: Re: Price of FreeBSD (was On Holy Wars...)
Cc: James Mansion <james@wgold.demon.co.uk>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

At 06:26 PM 4/17/97 -0300, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
>On Thu, 17 Apr 1997, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
>> > database server.  And you'd need a growth path beyond uniprocessor
>> > Intel, which
>> > free UNIXen (including Linux, as far as I'm concerned) don't have now.
>> 
>> freebsd doesn't have multiple intel processor support?
>> is this true?
>
>	nope, SMP support is alive and well in 3.0+. I believe its 
>integrated as part of 3.0+...isn't it?  But we've had SMP capabilities
>through patches since at least 2.2

Great. So the most powerful boxes can only be used by hackers and
not for any serious commercial purpose requiring stablilty.......didnt
we just have a (rather heated) discussion about this?

db
>
>Marc G. Fournier                                
>Systems Administrator @ hub.org 
>primary: scrappy@hub.org           secondary:
scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org 
>
>
>