From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Aug 22 09:29:21 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA17439 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 09:29:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from misery.sdf.com (misery.sdf.com [204.244.210.193]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA17432 for ; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 09:29:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tom by misery.sdf.com with smtp (Exim 1.62 #1) id 0x1wYO-0003T9-00; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 09:27:16 -0700 Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 09:27:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Tom Samplonius To: Simon Shapiro cc: hackers@freebsd.org, Nate Williams Subject: Re: Final request for help with release. (DPT boot floppy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Simon Shapiro wrote: > > Hi Tom Samplonius; On 22-Aug-97 you wrote: > > > > On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Nate Williams wrote: > > > > > > And then I'll just go back to solaris which works :) > > > > > > And is slower than a dog. I guess you'd need that RAID system to get > > > decent I/O performance out of it. :) :) > > > > According to a simple test with dd that I ran on the identical > > hardware > > with 2.2-stable and Solaris 2.5.1 x86, the performance results are > > basically the same. > > > > Tom > > I take this as a compliment. Thank you. How high is the load in your test. > We reject here anything under 256 concurrent processes and release after > 1024 concurrent processes ran continually for 48 hours. Then it goes to > System Test which does who know what... For me a "simple" test is a single dd. Also, Solaris 2.51 is getting kind moldy anyhow. There are all kinds of patches to be installed, which I didn't want to get into. > Simon Tom