From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 25 19:05:56 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0921E16A41C for ; Wed, 25 May 2005 19:05:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mkb@incubus.de) Received: from luzifer.incubus.de (incubus.de [80.237.207.83]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD72D43D53 for ; Wed, 25 May 2005 19:05:54 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mkb@incubus.de) Received: from [192.168.2.11] (p54AAFAEC.dip.t-dialin.net [84.170.250.236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by luzifer.incubus.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A42AB2E475; Wed, 25 May 2005 21:05:53 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4294CC9A.1000200@incubus.de> Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 21:06:02 +0200 From: Matthias Buelow User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050513) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kris Kennaway References: <84dead7205052420503fded0e9@mail.gmail.com> <4293FD27.90500@incubus.de> <20050525042706.GA60021@xor.obsecurity.org> <4294054C.9080207@incubus.de> <20050525050943.GA64320@xor.obsecurity.org> <42940A81.1030801@incubus.de> <20050525052214.GA76339@xor.obsecurity.org> <42940C87.5000705@incubus.de> <20050525053054.GA76491@xor.obsecurity.org> <4294AB75.9080908@incubus.de> <20050525185427.GB92006@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20050525185427.GB92006@xor.obsecurity.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Performance of 4.x vs 5.x (Re: Lifetime of FreeBSD branches) X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 19:05:56 -0000 Kris Kennaway wrote: > Others don't see this though, and in other cases it was *definitively > proven* to be caused by the issue I mentioned. I'll have to think > more about what to try next..thanks for running the tests. Perhaps it's something SATA-related? mkb.