From owner-freebsd-stable Wed Jul 25 6:41: 2 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from smtpproxy1.mitre.org (mb-20-100.mitre.org [129.83.20.100]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA57E37B408 for ; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 06:40:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jandrese@mitre.org) Received: from avsrv1.mitre.org (avsrv1.mitre.org [129.83.20.58]) by smtpproxy1.mitre.org (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f6PDeGD09618; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:40:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from MAILHUB1 (mailhub1.mitre.org [129.83.20.31]) by smtpsrv1.mitre.org (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f6PDeEX23951; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:40:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dhcp-105-164.mitre.org (128.29.105.164) by mailhub1.mitre.org with SMTP id 7143532; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:40:10 -0400 Message-ID: <3B5ECC36.47621190@mitre.org> Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:40:06 -0400 From: Jason Andresen Organization: The MITRE Corporation X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en]C-20000818M (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sung Nae Cho Cc: Nicolas Grieco , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD needs to awake and come out of SERVER only market! References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Sung Nae Cho wrote: > Aarrgh! Must...Resist...Trolling... Nuts, well I'll make this short: > > I don't know how far this have gone down the road and altered throughout > the course. But, I've never said desktops don't need stability. It all > started with some faction of FreeBSD users complaining about the default > enable of the disk write cache for modern hard drives in FreeBSD 4.x > series. My original post was literally responding to them, "Come on! > This is 21st Century and hard disks are reliable and we need to take full > advantage over those capable devices if FreeBSD's ever going to succeed in > desktop market. FreeBSD is no longer for server use only!" Personally, > I've been using UDMA capable disks (and, who doesn't these days?) with all > the DMA capabilities fully turned on and never had to compromise > performance with stability. If you are so worried about UDMA capable > disks to not to work as it suppose to, why in the world are you even > getting UDMA disk? Jee, lets get real here. Too many of the FreeBSD Where did this non-sequitor come from? Current state of FreeBSD: ATA disks are run at the maximum transfer rate the disk, controller, and cable allow. This includes things like UDMA100/66/33. Write Caching is enabled by default now. Filesystems have the option of running Softupdates, which almost as fast and _MUCH_ more reliable than async. ATAPI devices (CDROMs mostly) do not use DMA by default because a lot of ATAPI devices flat out lie about what they support. This is easily tunable if you are _sure_ your ATAPI devices supports DMA. It's just common sense. > Dept. of Physics, > Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University. As a Tech alumni, this embarrasses me. -- \ |_ _|__ __|_ \ __| Jason Andresen jandrese@mitre.org |\/ | | | / _| Network and Distributed Systems Engineer _| _|___| _| _|_\___| Office: 703-883-7755 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message