From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 24 15:11:18 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4AC516A4CE for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2005 15:11:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from luzifer.incubus.de (incubus.de [80.237.207.83]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F03343D54 for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2005 15:11:18 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mkb@incubus.de) Received: from [192.168.2.11] (pD9E68291.dip.t-dialin.net [217.230.130.145]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by luzifer.incubus.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C6962FEF0; Mon, 24 Jan 2005 16:12:36 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <41F51039.6030209@incubus.de> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 16:11:53 +0100 From: Matthias Buelow User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20050108) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Oliver Fuchs References: <41F47AC3.8080903@makeworld.com> <20050124051721.GA3879@oliverfuchs.onlinehome.de> <200501240902.43405.emanuel.strobl@gmx.net> <20050124103213.GA1695@oliverfuchs.onlinehome.de> In-Reply-To: <20050124103213.GA1695@oliverfuchs.onlinehome.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 5.3 I/O Performance / Linux 2.6.10 X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 15:11:18 -0000 Oliver Fuchs wrote: > Maybe there is a performance problem with FreeBSD - but again that was not > his question. I don't know why people are so obsessed with performance.. after all, you can't really load stock Unix systems properly anyways (like, say, an IBM mainframe, which you can keep at 90+% loaded all the time), so it really doesn't matter, as long as the machine is "fast enough". What matters a _lot_ more, imho, is stability and robustness, and imho here the attention should lie at this early stage of the 5.x tree. 5.3 robustness is far from spectacular, there're too many ugly bugs still around to bother about peak performance improvements just yet. Make it reliable first, and only then fast. mkb.