Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 18:59:04 GMT From: Mark <admin@asarian-host.net> To: "'FreeBSD-Questions Questions'" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Does FreeBSD 4.11-STABLE support the 8237R? Message-ID: <200606021859.k52Ix4gr067426@asarian-host.net> In-Reply-To: <20060602162712.51103.qmail@web33307.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> -----Original Message----- > From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Danial Thom > Sent: vrijdag 2 juni 2006 18:28 > To: Scott Hiemstra; 'FreeBSD-Questions Questions' > Subject: RE: Does FreeBSD 4.11-STABLE support the 8237R? > > --- Scott Hiemstra <shiemstra@h2.com> wrote: > > > > Did you say you are running a server? That MB is only suitable for > > > desktop use, as it has the slowest ethernet controller known to man > > > on a 32/33Mhz bus. Running this MB as a server is like putting > > > cheap, skinny tires on your porsche. > > > > > > DT > > > > Personaly, I appreciate your dedication to maximum performance but > > please notice this thread is in reference to swapping a MB for another > > MB and coments like yours are not appreciated. > > > > Would you prefer if I had stated? > > > > "I have the same board in a crappy server running 4.11 (FreeBSD > > 4.11-STABLE #0) and no problems to report." > > > > Please notice I never said what the box was doing nor did I ask for > > your opinion of what MB/NIC I use in my systems. This SERVER is pur- > > pose built and runs stable 24/7 as a low volume outbound mail server > > so the performance of the NIC is not my primary concern. Please keep > > your useless comments to yourself as they do nothing but waste disk > > space, CPU time and the valuable time of people who attempt to help > > others on this list. > > > > Scott > > So if someone is planning on using a crappy motherboard as a server its > not appropriate to mention that the replacement is not suitable for the > task? So since you're replacing the MB, why not take the opportunity to > use something suitable. Because it means introducing a whole slew of new, unknown variables. :) When I first installed 4.10R, it did not even support the 8237; and disk performance on that board was limited to a terribly slow Multi-World DMA 2 mode (I think it was that; very slow, at least). So, imagine my delight when 4.11-STABLE supported the 8237 at last. Buying a newer type motherboard for 4.11-STABLE (where would you find one for socket 754, so soon replaced by socket 939, anyway?) would likely mean an unsupported south-bridge chip, and being back to square one. Nope. I'm gonna stick with what works for 4.11-STABLE (as that is still my preferred FreeBSD version; and if I cannot find a new motherboard after the new one dies, I will just continue to run the whole thing in a Vmware box). As for the LAN, since I only have a 100 Mb network, I see no reason to assume even a less than ideal performing gigabit LAN would slow things down (unless its performance dropped below 10%; and I'm sure it's not that bad). In fact, not to be unnecessarily contrary, but I would ere say this motherboard is totally unsuited for desktop use (I have a shiny P5WD2 Premium for that), and that this board is rather ideally suited for a FreeBSD 4.11 system. - Mark
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200606021859.k52Ix4gr067426>