From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jul 19 19: 8: 1 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from serenity.mcc.ac.uk (serenity.mcc.ac.uk [130.88.200.93]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3079237B401 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2001 19:07:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jcm@freebsd-uk.eu.org) Received: from dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org ([130.88.200.97] ident=root) by serenity.mcc.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.05 #6) id 15NPhu-000HYo-00 for freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 03:07:58 +0100 Received: (from jcm@localhost) by dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) id f6K27vF07528 for freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 03:07:57 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from jcm) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 03:07:57 +0100 From: j mckitrick To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: sysadminmag update Message-ID: <20010720030757.A7504@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG So, after all this tweaking, "we found that FreeBSD tuned had very similar performance to Linux (untuned) when running 1000 or less simultaneous sends. Overall, the tuned version of FreeBSD was 27% faster at sending email than the untuned version. FreeBSD mail sending performance peaked at 1000 to 1500 simultaneous sends, and then steadily declined as simultaneous connections increased." does this matter? jcm -- o-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-o | ~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jonathon McKitrick ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | | "I prefer the term 'Artificial Person' myself." | o-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-o To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message