From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 13 18:13:00 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CF5C16A4DA for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 18:13:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chad@shire.net) Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (mail.shire.net [166.70.252.250]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C15DC43D97 for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 18:12:46 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from chad@shire.net) Received: from [67.171.127.191] (helo=[192.168.99.68]) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.51) id 1G15g5-000289-EK; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 12:12:45 -0600 In-Reply-To: <20060713180418.50118.qmail@web33311.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060713180418.50118.qmail@web33311.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v750) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <302DCD13-7FFC-4525-AD32-07183BA51BCE@shire.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC" Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 12:12:44 -0600 To: danial_thom@yahoo.com X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.750) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 67.171.127.191 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: chad@shire.net X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on hobbiton.shire.net); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: FreeBSD Questions Subject: Re: Are hardware vendors starting to bail on FreeBSD ... ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 18:13:00 -0000 On Jul 13, 2006, at 12:04 PM, Danial Thom wrote: > > > --- "Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC" > wrote: > >> >> On Jul 13, 2006, at 10:47 AM, Danial Thom >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >> SMP has overhead but FreeBSD on 2 processors >> can do more work than >> FreeBSD on the same HW with just 1 processor. >> That is a fact. >> >>> Are you people stupid or delusional? >> >> No, and the data you posted did not support >> your allegations of >> performance either. >> >> Chad > > I doubt you have the capacity to understand the > tests, and as they say, you can't educate the > woodchucks. You can doubt all you want. The plain fact is you said things like 200-400% and the tests and commentary did not support that. You also inferred that a 2 CPU system in SMP mode would overall be able to do less work than a 1 CPU system in UP mode. Again, you have given no evidence that this is true and the stuff you quoted did not support that. It did say that there is overhead in the SMP code that makes things less efficient and that the overhead is more than comparable OSes, at least for the Sparc T1 stuff. You are the idiot, Mr. Thom. You may be intellectually smart but you are a blooming idiot when it comes to public discourse. And I will take the advice given earlier, to stop feeding the trolls -- you are a supreme troll. I may make 2 recommendations: #1 read "How to win friends and influence people" . Here is a quick synopsis. #2 learn how to use your email program and to trim posts you reply to. signing off Chad --- Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC Your Web App and Email hosting provider chad at shire.net