From owner-freebsd-questions Mon Feb 9 11:04:33 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA26337 for questions-outgoing; Mon, 9 Feb 1998 11:04:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from gdi.uoregon.edu (gdi.uoregon.edu [128.223.170.30]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA26282 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 1998 11:04:16 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dwhite@gdi.uoregon.edu) Received: from localhost (dwhite@localhost) by gdi.uoregon.edu (8.8.7/8.8.8) with SMTP id LAA26238; Mon, 9 Feb 1998 11:04:09 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dwhite@gdi.uoregon.edu) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 1998 11:04:09 -0800 (PST) From: Doug White Reply-To: Doug White To: Konrad Heuer cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Multiprocessing in FreeBSD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 9 Feb 1998, Konrad Heuer wrote: > Some people argue Linux should be better for larger servers since it does > already support symmetric multiprocessing in an production kernel. The Linux people tend to make code available first then fix it later. We like the opposite philosophy. > I know SMP is in FreeBSD-current. What are the experiences? Does it behave > well? Will there be a chance for a RELEASE with SMP support this year? If -CURRENT goes to release, then yes. It depends if 2.2.x is still sufficient or if we're ready for 3.0, or if 3.0 is ready for us :) Certain times of -current are actually quite stable. It's a matter of picking a good day to grab current on. Doug White | University of Oregon Internet: dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu | Residence Networking Assistant http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dwhite | Computer Science Major To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe questions" in the body of the message