Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2010 07:59:48 -0500 From: Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org> To: "O. Hartmann" <ohartman@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de> Cc: Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org>, freebsd-hpc@freebsd.org, postmaster@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Mailing list freebsd-hpc@freebsd.org is being retired Message-ID: <20101106125947.GA85107@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> In-Reply-To: <4CD42CE0.6020605@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de> References: <20101101140613.GA9364@albert.catwhisker.org> <AANLkTimaw8Q5RwjRV0u2ZOU=FeYwZKameeuLGUJSwVk6@mail.gmail.com> <567446.33929.qm@web56306.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <20101105143113.GA73335@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <4CD42CE0.6020605@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--MGYHOYXEY6WxJCY8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 05:12:16PM +0100, O. Hartmann wrote: > On 11/05/10 15:31, Brooks Davis wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 05:25:37PM -0700, Eric De La Cruz Lugo wrote: >>> Where this HPC topic will be handled? freebsd-performance@?, we should >>> ask to Brook Davis. >>=20 >> Most things could be handled on -performance. Other things would be a >> good fit for -net or -hackers. Over all the list has never had any >> traffic so while it seemed like a good idea at the time, I don't see any >> real value in keeping it around. If work and discussion picks up >> elsewhere to the point that it's off topic or distracting we can alwasy >> recreate the list. >>=20 >> -- Brooks >=20 > @performance is a list on which people post when problems or tuning=20 > potential issues arise with the OS itself. As I understand 'HPC', this li= st=20 > is more related to the 'performance' used in a scientific manner. We do n= ot=20 > have a list tuning, so I would put hings from @performance rather into=20 > @tuning. Well, it's hard to express my point of view an this foreign=20 > language, so I hope I could make clear what I think. >=20 > On the other hand, if @HPC is related to a more scientific view of=20 > 'performance', then it also can be retired since FreeBSD doe not play any= =20 > role in scientific computing any more. No HPC compilers, not GPGPU suppor= t=20 > anywhere. Approximately ten years ago, when my former institute used=20 > FreeBSD as a HPC platform, we used NAGs math libraries and compilers=20 > natively offered for FreeBSD. With the dawn of the AMD/Intel amd64=20 > architecture FreeBSD got more and more insignificant. Even the lack of=20 > 64Bit Linuxulator capabilities and therefore the inability of using Linux= =20 > compilers and GPGPU software widended this gap. A lovely rant with some relevent points, but 100% irrelevent to the fact that this thread is probably the majority of traffic this list has seen. -- Brooks --MGYHOYXEY6WxJCY8 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFM1VFDXY6L6fI4GtQRAl5BAKC413iY5t0O8NhoD7Rtep1cCDsX6wCgihof GTUbslbZDBsufve4xPYq/Ew= =u2vp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --MGYHOYXEY6WxJCY8--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20101106125947.GA85107>