From owner-freebsd-questions Sat Jun 26 12:42:32 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from osgroup.com (unknown [38.229.41.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFC0014C1F for ; Sat, 26 Jun 1999 12:42:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from stan@osgroup.com) Received: from stan166 ([38.229.41.237]) by osgroup.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA16643 for ; Sat, 26 Jun 1999 14:31:31 -0500 Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Sat, 26 Jun 1999 14:44:10 -0500 Message-ID: <01BEBFE2.59B4FC60.stan@osgroup.com> From: Constantine Shkolny Reply-To: "stan@osgroup.com" To: "freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG" Subject: RE: Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1999 14:44:08 -0500 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Go to hackers mailing list archive and look for discussions from the last three days. They are talking exactly about this. On Saturday, June 26, 1999 2:22 PM, Thatcher Hubbard [SMTP:hubbardj@earthlink.net] wrote: > achieves better network throughput than Linux. I've heard a lot about > the > not-so-fine granularity thread locking in the Linux kernel, what stage is > the FreeBSD kernel at when it comes to threading? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message