From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu Oct 26 22:56:09 1995
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id WAA00904
          for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 26 Oct 1995 22:56:09 -0700
Received: from rah.star-gate.com (rah.star-gate.com [204.188.121.18])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id WAA00899
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Thu, 26 Oct 1995 22:56:05 -0700
Received: from rah.star-gate.com (localhost.v-site.net [127.0.0.1]) by rah.star-gate.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id WAA11913; Thu, 26 Oct 1995 22:55:41 -0700
Message-Id: <199510270555.WAA11913@rah.star-gate.com>
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.2 7/18/95
To: "Russell L. Carter" <rcarter@geli.com>
cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: New lmbench available (fwd) 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 26 Oct 1995 22:31:23 PDT."
             <199510270531.WAA05178@geli.clusternet> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 22:55:40 -0700
From: "Amancio Hasty Jr." <hasty@rah.star-gate.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

>>> "Russell L. Carter" said:
 > > > > Sorry folks, my ISP is downgrading from FreeBSD Pentiums to SGI
 > > > > multiprocessor boxes (no offense Larry ;-), so guess what, I've been
 > > > > basically hosed for the last three days.
 > > > 
 > > > You went from FAST machines to SLOW machines?  Why in earth would you do
 > > > that?
 > > 
 > > Actually, they're not the only ones.  BEST did the same thing and
 > > apparently the SGI is working fairly well for them..  But hey, let's
 > > compare apples with apples here..  The SGI machines are multiprocessor
 > > R4000 boxes costing tens of thousands of dollars, and a fully loaded
 > > P5 system will run you $5K or so..
 > 
 > 
 > ahem. cough.  "BEST" is my ISP... and there is more fun to come,
 > seems we have had a (and I paraphrase here) "sophisticated and persistant"
 > attack that has killed the SGIs in many interesting ways.  All through
 > this the lonely little P5-90 box with the NCR controller running a
 > July kernel is just chugging along, so web service has been unaffected,
 > as far as I can tell.

You  of course are joking when saying  that Best is using an ncr controllers.

	Cheers,
	Amancio