From owner-freebsd-current Tue Apr 25 1: 2: 2 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from hayseed.net (hayseed.net [207.181.249.194]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FC4037B820 for ; Tue, 25 Apr 2000 01:01:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from cnielsen@pobox.com) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hayseed.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA28386; Mon, 24 Apr 2000 23:56:50 -0700 Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 23:56:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Christopher Nielsen X-Sender: enkhyl@hayseed.net Reply-To: cnielsen@pobox.com To: Vallo Kallaste Cc: "Brandon D. Valentine" , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SMP changes and breaking kld object module compatibility In-Reply-To: <20000425094709.A5210@myhakas.matti.ee> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 25 Apr 2000, Vallo Kallaste wrote: > Fair enough, but as somebody (Greg Lehey if I recall) said it was taken > about 5 years for Sun to develop fine SMP support and we can't expect to > be faster. FreeBSD is quite behind of Linux on the SMP issues currently, > Linux is somewhat behind of NT and NT, I believe, is still behind of > Solaris for SMP. Actually, I don't know, because my Solaris 8 CD is > still on the way :( Solaris is far and away better at SMP than NT. I haven't seen NT running on 64-cpu machines, and I certainly haven't seen it scaling very nearly linearly to ~20 CPUs (diminishing returns start to take effect around 22 cpus). Solaris has had this since at least 2.6 (when I last evaluated this) with 2.[78] adding greater stability and more features. -- Christopher Nielsen (enkhyl|cnielsen)@pobox.com Enkhyl on IRC To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message