Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 13:34:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Danial Thom <danial_thom@yahoo.com> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, "Derrick T. Woolworth" <dwoolworth@gmail.com> Cc: performance@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Performance 4.x vs. 6.x Message-ID: <20061013203436.46152.qmail@web33312.mail.mud.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20061012222508.GA63618@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Yeah, bury your head in the sand as always. Its been proven over and over. Robert Watson has admitted many times that 6.x is not as fast as 4.x uniprocessor, but you guys still continue to claim otherwise. Clowns following clowns to the land of nowhere. Its virtually impossible to build a threaded kernel that is faster than a non-threaded kernel for UP operation. You can ask Matt Dillon or Robert Watson or Terry Lambert or anyone else that you think has a brain. Its just plain stupid to suggest otherwise. --- Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 05:17:31PM -0500, > Derrick T. Woolworth wrote: > > Where are the numbers for this? Where is the > proof? Are you using > > CARP and PF in the 4.x kernel? Are you using > UNIX sockets in 4.x? > > > > The fact that your claims haven't been > substantiated leads me to > > believe you're not really trying to solve any > problems. > > Just ignore this guy, he has an extremely > narrow focus of what he > wants to use FreeBSD for, and since FreeBSD > doesn't meet his standards > in this single area he claims that the entire > OS is useless for any > purposes. > > Kris > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061013203436.46152.qmail>