Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 18:25:16 -0400 From: Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com> To: bala@mataira.com Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Release Question Message-ID: <20041009182516.34d243a0.wmoran@potentialtech.com> In-Reply-To: <41686104.20409@mataira.com> References: <41686104.20409@mataira.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Balakumar Velmurugan <vbkumar@mataira.com> wrote: > Hi, > We are starting development on a new project that would go > production in the fall of 2005. I have been evaluating Release 4.x and > 5.x branches for the suitability. Our target platform is AMD64 and AMD32 > uni-processor systems. We like most of 5.x features except for its > performance and conerns about the availability of a STABLE version in > our time window, and I would like your opinion to choose the right > FreeBSD version tree to start the development right now. BTW, we dont > have any plans to run on SMP architecture, our target platform will > always be uni-processor based. Questions are, > > 1. By Sep 2005, do you think 5.x performance will be optimized and be > comparable to today's 4.x stable versions ? 5.3 is supposed to be stable, and it's expected to be on part with 4.x performance, and it's supposed to release before the end of the month. >From what I've seen and heard, it looks like all that is going to happen. > 2. By Sep 2005, do you think 5.x will be as stable as today's 4.x > released versions ? Yes. > 3. What is the most architecturally optimized FreeBSD version if he > primary application is network services, IP forwarding and various > TCP/UDP services ? 5 and 4 will probably be about the same come next year. -- Bill Moran Potential Technologies http://www.potentialtech.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041009182516.34d243a0.wmoran>