From owner-freebsd-current Tue Apr 17 15:20:32 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from a.mx.everquick.net (a.mx.everquick.net [216.89.137.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9934C37B423 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 15:20:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from eddy+public+spam@noc.everquick.net) Received: from localhost (eddy@localhost) by a.mx.everquick.net (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f3HMKMM12269; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 22:20:22 GMT X-EverQuick-No-Abuse: Report any e-mail abuse to Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 22:20:21 +0000 (GMT) From: "E.B. Dreger" To: Matt Dillon Cc: Alfred Perlstein , "Justin T. Gibbs" , Doug Barton , "'current@freebsd.org'" Subject: Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost In-Reply-To: <200104172200.f3HM0TI09802@earth.backplane.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 15:00:29 -0700 (PDT) > From: Matt Dillon > > WILL be a performance hit. WILL introduce major bugs. IS unnecessary, > DOESN'T make any sense whatsoever, is at CROSS PURPOSES with goals > already stated (not having any serious contention in the first place), > REQUIRES massive changes to the code with not a chance in hell of > producing an equivalent performance improvement for the trouble. What was the name of that network stack... There was a net stack that spent significant amounts of effort creating something asynchronous, with fancy preemption. In the end, they trashed the whole thing, because run-to-completion was faster. Eddy --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. EverQuick Internet / EternalCommerce Division Phone: (316) 794-8922 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message