Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 18:59:14 -0800 (PST) From: Barney Cordoba <barney_cordoba@yahoo.com> To: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: To SMP or not to SMP Message-ID: <1357613954.19271.YahooMailClassic@web121604.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <D31EB71D-3274-4A9A-93BC-B0C2AB3C9FC5@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
=0A=0A--- On Mon, 1/7/13, Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com> wrote:=0A=0A>= From: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com>=0A> Subject: Re: To SMP or not t= o SMP=0A> To: "Barney Cordoba" <barney_cordoba@yahoo.com>=0A> Cc: freebsd-n= et@freebsd.org=0A> Date: Monday, January 7, 2013, 9:38 PM=0A> On Jan 7, 201= 3, at 6:25 PM, Barney=0A> Cordoba wrote:=0A> =0A> > I have a situation wher= e I have to run 9.1 on an old=0A> single core box. Does anyone have a handl= e on whether it's=0A> better to build a non SMP kernel or to just use a sta= ndard=0A> SMP build with just the one core? Thanks.=0A> =0A> =A0=A0=A0 Non-= SMP. I don't see why it would be wise=0A> to involve the standard locking s= tructure overhead for a=0A> single-core box.=0A=0AIt might not be wise, but= I'd guess that 99% of the development work=0Ais being done on SMP systems,= so who knows what weirdness non-smp=0Asystems might have.=0A=0ABC
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1357613954.19271.YahooMailClassic>