Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 17:12:11 -0400 From: Deepak Jain <deepak@ai.net> To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no> Cc: bjohns123@msn.com Subject: Re: KVA space problems? Message-ID: <40B659AB.7070109@ai.net> In-Reply-To: <xzp7juyp3dd.fsf@dwp.des.no> References: <BAY8-F8SjjUgRc9nYKS000417c2@hotmail.com> <xzp7juyp3dd.fsf@dwp.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > First of all, you need to realize that GoBSD is a DragonFly advocacy > site. That doesn't necessarily make it a bad site, but it does mean > it's biased. I'm only going to respond to the opinion section of the post, not the technical patch. "The successor of the very stable and reliable line of the FreeBSD 4.x series is the development line of DragonFlyBSD." -http://gobsd.com/bsd My question to that author would be "Why base something off of something unstable?" For the record, we run over 35,000 FreeBSD machines all over the world (real number is higher, I'm just giving you the last total I have) as production, 24/7 machines on our own network. We are fine with DragonFly too, but its more like choosing from types of the same fruit, not necessarily apples and oranges.. think Golden Delicious vs Red Delicious. I don't have anything to technically discuss the memory concerns in that patch only that everything is solvable. Yahoo and hundreds of other companies rely on FreeBSD for production equipment. DJ
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?40B659AB.7070109>