From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 9 22:25:21 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 932D316A4CE for ; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 22:25:21 +0000 (GMT) Received: from internet.potentialtech.com (h-66-167-251-6.phlapafg.covad.net [66.167.251.6]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28E3343D41 for ; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 22:25:19 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from wmoran@potentialtech.com) Received: from working.potentialtech.com (pa-plum-cmts1e-68-68-113-64.pittpa.adelphia.net [68.68.113.64]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by internet.potentialtech.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 184E269A3F; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 18:25:17 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 18:25:16 -0400 From: Bill Moran To: bala@mataira.com Message-Id: <20041009182516.34d243a0.wmoran@potentialtech.com> In-Reply-To: <41686104.20409@mataira.com> References: <41686104.20409@mataira.com> Organization: Potential Technologies X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd4.9) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: vbkumar@mataira.com cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Release Question X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 22:25:21 -0000 Balakumar Velmurugan 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