From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 9 19:05:01 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BABEE83 for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2014 19:05:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.ultra-secure.de (mail.ultra-secure.de [88.198.178.88]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 933612700 for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2014 19:05:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 51841 invoked by uid 89); 9 Jun 2014 19:04:18 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.4.0 ppid: 51836, pid: 51838, t: 0.0364s scanners: attach: 1.4.0 clamav: 0.97.3/m:55/d:19078 Received: from unknown (HELO ewzw033.ewadmin.local) (rainer@ultra-secure.de@212.71.117.93) by mail.ultra-secure.de with ESMTPA; 9 Jun 2014 19:04:18 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.2\)) Subject: Re: Not to beat a dead horse, but ... From: Rainer Duffner In-Reply-To: <5394F72E.4080306@m5p.com> Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 21:04:13 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <5394A848.7030609@m5p.com> <5394B80A.2030901@m5p.com> <20140608232203.GN31367@funkthat.com> <5394F72E.4080306@m5p.com> To: FreeBSD Stable X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.2) X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2014 19:05:01 -0000 =09 Am 09.06.2014 um 01:52 schrieb George Mitchell : > On 06/08/14 19:22, John-Mark Gurney wrote: >> [...] it turns out that the electricity >> savings in a year, paid for the entire cost of the new switch... We >> were talking ~$250/year in savings, so, upgrading can end up saving >> you money... >>=20 > Thanks for the advice on what hardware I should run. But why should I > believe that upgrading to SMP and running with ULE will make my life > better? In fact, when I tried ULE + a six-core system + dnetc + make > buildworld, etc., a couple of years ago (I do have one SMP system), > the results were just as appalling compared to 4BSD as with a single > processor. =97 George I think a lot of progress has been made as compared to =84a couple of = years ago=93. I have no hard numbers to back that up, of course, because I don=92t = have a uniform work-load that I can throw different releases (and = kernels) at. In addition to that, older FreeBSD releases generally run on (much) = older hardware and thus I can=92t compare the performance directly. But I would hesitate to, in essence, call the results of the efforts of = the developers over the last years =84appalling=93. That said, you can still buy single-core systems and I actually run one: = an ALIX 2d13. And I think my Centrino-laptop is also single-core (but = it=92s from 2004=85). But the Alix runs pfSense, not FreeBSD. As such, the pfSense-project is = responsible for issuing patches (and does so). People running non-standard kernel for other reasons (VIMAGE comes to = mind) probably have a similar problem. AFAIK, you should be able to run a local freebsd-update server and build = the patches yourself. I just don=92t know if it will actually fix your problem out of the box = or what else would have to be done so that freebsd-update replaces the = kernel with the one from your custom freebsd-update server...