From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Mar 10 13:15: 3 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from malasada.lava.net (malasada.lava.net [199.222.42.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF0CB37BB24 for ; Fri, 10 Mar 2000 13:14:57 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from cliftonr@lava.net) Received: from localhost (1310 bytes) by malasada.lava.net via sendmail with P:stdio/R:inet_hosts/T:smtp (sender: ) (ident using unix) id for ; Fri, 10 Mar 2000 11:14:41 -1000 (HST) (Smail-3.2.0.106 1999-Mar-31 #3 built 1999-Dec-7) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 11:14:41 -1000 From: Clifton Royston To: Matt Heckaman Cc: FreeBSD-STABLE Subject: Re: FreeBSD SMP in 3.4-stable Message-ID: <20000310111441.H13914@lava.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre2i In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 03:19:20PM -0500, Matt Heckaman wrote: > Hello, > > I have a production server which at this time is a single PII 400. I wish > to put in this machine a pair of PII 400 to reduce the load that's on this > machine. Right now it hovers around 3.00-4.00 load averages, which is just > too high, it's starting to lag the machine some. > > My questions is, how tested and stable is the SMP in FreeBSD 3.4-stable? I've been running a dual-processor PIII-500 "Fresh out of the box" from 3.3 CD-ROM release, and as 3.4-stable updated from CVS. SMP seems very stable. -- Clifton -- Clifton Royston -- LavaNet Systems Architect -- cliftonr@lava.net The named which can be named is not the Eternal named. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message