From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu Feb 18 19: 1:19 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from feral.com (feral.com [192.67.166.1])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AF9211552
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Thu, 18 Feb 1999 19:01:16 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from mjacob@feral.com)
Received: from localhost (mjacob@localhost)
	by feral.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA25593;
	Thu, 18 Feb 1999 19:01:03 -0800
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 19:01:02 -0800 (PST)
From: Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com>
X-Sender: mjacob@feral-gw
Reply-To: mjacob@feral.com
To: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com>
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Panic in FFS/4.0 as of yesterday
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9902182249240.61913-100000@herring.nlsystems.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.04.9902181859110.24373-100000@feral-gw>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG


Oh, btw- I should clarify a little about this test and some spice to the
mix... The same test on a system that is 25% of the cpu power and 25% of
the memory running solaris 2.7 Intel not only successfully has always runs
this test but also retains a quite acceptable responsiveness. Please don't
make me claim Slowlaris is better!


-matt





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