On Tue, 25 Apr 2000, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
>Because if we do not provide a STABLE ABI, we WON'T get third-party
>(binary only) kernel modules.
>I'm very divided in this issue. 4.x has just started, and would be
>seriously impaired if no further improvements to it's SMP get in. On
>the other hand, if we can't garantee third party vendors a stable ABI,
>we won't get third party vendors.
The number one excuse large third party server vendors use to justify
use of NT over Linux on their high end SMP systems is the poor
performance of Linux SMP. This is a tremendous opportunity for FreeBSD
to take market share. People are seeing the virtues of free, open
source operating systems in the server farm and providing top notch SMP
support in FreeBSD will help to see that we make further inroads that
the Linux guys do. If the BSDi code assists us in improving SMP
performance and if the corporate backing helps our PR image, then we
could be in for a fun ride. This is the time to start thinking in terms
of "What can we do better?" or we're going to lose the battle. Sure,
those changes could go into 5.x and be released when RELENG_5 is
branched a year from now. But in this business, a year is 6 months too
late. Think about that before you object to what appear to be vast
improvements in the performance of the RELENG_4 branch while it is just
getting off the ground.
Brandon D. Valentine
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Illegitimi non carborundum.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message