Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 15:41:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug <Doug@gorean.org> To: Alex Le Heux <alexlh@p.funk.org> Cc: kris@airnet.net, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 3C905 versus Intel Etherexpress PRO/100?! Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9907121539280.8174-100000@dt054n86.san.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <199907122230.AAA25713@p.funk.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Alex Le Heux wrote:
> We're talking about a 2% difference in cpu utilisation here. Is that
> even statistically significant?
Yes. I have more than one environment where every cpu cycle is
precious, either due to long-term load or due to the need for fast
recovery from load bursts.
A fundamental design element for a server OS (as opposed to a
desktop OS) is to always assume that *every* cpu cycle is valuable.
Doug
--
On account of being a democracy and run by the people, we are the only
nation in the world that has to keep a government four years, no matter
what it does.
-- Will Rogers
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9907121539280.8174-100000>