From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 25 05:58:53 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BB3016A41B for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 05:58:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from beijing.liangjie@gmail.com) Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.153]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE32613C4CE for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 05:58:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from beijing.liangjie@gmail.com) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 16so560142fgg.35 for ; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 21:58:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=GAog24PFgOQ9bXnUqfYsZfAyR/OxE0uF7iRpcWywL6U=; b=TnuDlHfLMlodzKdaH1Pnq6QeqKZFSF9+obuBPpsRuyEcf1iyMsj4ct500CEeXGiGGY9IjLmu9YeH/bpaj7afXD35SVz3rHsYXlv7BjO86YVlI9Pbr2+LGjs/BUBmQU1XC16WWs1jnsEXkrK2/eYqlO906Cho2PE3W3bA79YgNS4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=oVUKuMjnFq1jpKIY7kHMD4GaLfGhMpnFnC0ZI+Sd8LN58wBH6YJmVJoLscJPE7GIEzympeMk7axadmzbblaRNVIPJzb6QAgF8Gg76UWFuaLOnsXQw2n6cwqiVcuUaVnRpf7zkmBgOULbS/d1Q69dhP/rDl71sqcASbqpkPu7jeQ= Received: by 10.86.50.8 with SMTP id x8mr1448573fgx.61.1201240731816; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 21:58:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.89.14 with HTTP; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 21:58:51 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <84a208a0801242158q632314dfpd370a2fee2f87390@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 13:58:51 +0800 From: "william wong" To: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?=" In-Reply-To: <86fxwn877v.fsf@ds4.des.no> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <84a208a0801232306k6a34134aqd549a1ba2160fe41@mail.gmail.com> <86bq7bwlot.fsf@ds4.des.no> <84a208a0801240456q3154de92me73e846df84d587a@mail.gmail.com> <86prvrv0b1.fsf@ds4.des.no> <84a208a0801240711j979874apad2d17c9afdbd6e@mail.gmail.com> <86fxwn877v.fsf@ds4.des.no> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD hacker 101 X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 05:58:53 -0000 That brings me to another ponder: why juniper and cisco are using FreeBSD and not Linux even Linux performs better in an UP environment? 2008/1/25, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav : > "william wong" writes: > > Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav writes: > > > "william wong" writes: > > > > It seems that Juniper favors the even number FreeBSD's. > > > Only because 5 was a dog. They probably stuck with 4 for a while, th= en > > > switched to 6 once they had ascertained that it was significantly mor= e > > > stable than 5. I would be surprised if they skipped 7. > > Please pardon my ignorance of the jargons. Does that mean 5 is not > > stable or does not perform or what? > > FreeBSD 5 was not a very good series. It was released late and had > issues with both stability and performance. FreeBSD 6 corrected the > stability issues and some of the worst performance issues. FreeBSD 7 > took care of the remaining performance issues; it may not be as fast as > 4 was on UP, but it beats Linux on SMP. > > (there's no point in comparing SMP performance between 4 and 7 since 4 > had a single-threaded kernel and practically no userland thread support) > > DES > -- > Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no >