From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 16 03:40:22 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: performance@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E0B616A5A5; Mon, 16 Oct 2006 03:40:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from markir@paradise.net.nz) Received: from linda-3.paradise.net.nz (linda-3.paradise.net.nz [203.96.152.182]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F070443D62; Mon, 16 Oct 2006 03:40:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from markir@paradise.net.nz) Received: from smtp-3.paradise.net.nz (tclsnelb1-src-1.paradise.net.nz [203.96.152.172]) by linda-3.paradise.net.nz (Paradise.net.nz) with ESMTP id <0J77003NMM6UBS@linda-3.paradise.net.nz>; Mon, 16 Oct 2006 16:40:13 +1300 (NZDT) Received: from [192.168.1.11] (218-101-28-242.dsl.clear.net.nz [218.101.28.242]) by smtp-3.paradise.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id F21C4B0D5D0; Mon, 16 Oct 2006 16:40:05 +1300 (NZDT) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 16:40:03 +1300 From: Mark Kirkwood In-reply-to: <20061016032534.GB6398@soaustin.net> To: Mark Linimon Message-id: <4532FF13.7040708@paradise.net.nz> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20061003) References: <20061015174750.13249.qmail@web33306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <45327764.2080904@protected-networks.net> <20061016032534.GB6398@soaustin.net> X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 04:13:33 +0000 Cc: danial_thom@yahoo.com, Michael Butler , performance@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Stable Subject: Re: Performance 4.x vs. 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 03:40:22 -0000 Mark Linimon wrote: > On Sun, Oct 15, 2006 at 02:01:08PM -0400, Michael Butler wrote: >> For everyone's benefit then, please feel free to submit your patches >> along with your technical analysis. > > I think his best bet is a fork, instead. Then he can tell all the people > that volunteer to work on _his_ project exactly what to do, and see how > far he gets with that approach. > > He might have got further by volunteering to create and supply profiles for those specific workloads that were faster in 4.x than 6.x on UP machinery etc... i.e. help make 6.x better rather than discourage the development team (whose efforts are much appreciated by the rest of us that are happily using 6.x...) regards Mark