From owner-freebsd-current Wed Oct 30 12:59:56 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EFD337B401 for ; Wed, 30 Oct 2002 12:59:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from alpha.yumyumyum.org (dsl092-171-091.wdc1.dsl.speakeasy.net [66.92.171.91]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5216B43E77 for ; Wed, 30 Oct 2002 12:59:48 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from culverk@yumyumyum.org) Received: from alpha.yumyumyum.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpha.yumyumyum.org (8.12.6/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g9UKwjYN020085; Wed, 30 Oct 2002 15:58:45 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from culverk@yumyumyum.org) Received: from localhost (culverk@localhost) by alpha.yumyumyum.org (8.12.6/8.12.5/Submit) with ESMTP id g9UKwg0g020082; Wed, 30 Oct 2002 15:58:43 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from culverk@yumyumyum.org) X-Authentication-Warning: alpha.yumyumyum.org: culverk owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 15:58:42 -0500 (EST) From: Kenneth Culver To: Stijn Hoop Cc: Garance A Drosihn , Raymond Kohler , Subject: Re: speed of -CURRENT [was: questions about the state of current] In-Reply-To: <20021030091356.GC94770@pcwin002.win.tue.nl> Message-ID: <20021030155756.R19739-100000@alpha.yumyumyum.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,X_AUTH_WARNING,NO_MX_FOR_FROM,AWL version=2.31 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > The systems hostname was changed between Aug & Oct, but it's the > same laptop, a P3-800 w/256MB memory. > > Thoughts? > I have not really noticed a performance difference here. In fact with WITNESS and INVARIANTS disabled, I find that -CURRENT seems to be a bit faster than -STABLE. Ken To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message