From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Jun 15  1:56:54 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from blount.mail.mindspring.net (blount.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.226])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C30337B405
	for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 15 Jun 2001 01:56:42 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from tlambert2@mindspring.com)
Received: from mindspring.com (dialup-209.245.138.115.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net [209.245.138.115])
	by blount.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id EAA13799;
	Fri, 15 Jun 2001 04:55:55 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <3B29CDB9.FF517D3B@mindspring.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 01:56:25 -0700
From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
Reply-To: tlambert2@mindspring.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony}  (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Devin Butterfield <dbutter@wireless.net>
Cc: Alfred Perlstein <bright@rush.net>, Rajappa Iyer <rsi@panix.com>,
	hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Sysadmin article
References: <200106150223.f5F2NLW08368@panix1.panix.com> <20010615001318.F1832@superconductor.rush.net> <01061422021000.39234@dbm.wireless.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-hackers.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-hackers>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-hackers>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

Devin Butterfield wrote:
> On Thursday 14 June 2001  9:13, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> > * Rajappa Iyer <rsi@panix.com> [010614 22:23] wrote:
> > > http://www.sysadminmag.com/articles/2001/0107/0107a/0107a.htm
> > >
> > > Any obvious reasons why FreeBSD performed so poorly
> > > for these people?
> >
> > Because they did benchmarks on systems without tuning.
> 
> So why doesn't FreeBSD ship with a "tuned" configuration?
> Just curious...

Tuning trades performance for reliability.  By default,
FreeBSD is reliable for any general purpose application,
and does not overcommit resources which will never end
up being used in the majority of applications.

They have a special purpose application written to a
particular architecture with a particular implementation
model.  Tuning FreeBSD for this use would de-tune it for
other uses.

See my other posting.

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message