>So ibm would rather an outside vendor do the measurements? >and that any customer with performance problems should run >future or unsupported levels of code in production? >And that vm developement's opinions are better than real data? >my my. You really seem to try hard to get me wrong. We are off cause doing performance measurements, but because we do things professional we wait for our distribution partners to include our new stuff in their distributions. Our performance people do publish measurements on internal builds, that would not reflect the customers view!
As I stated in an earlier posting, we do not recommend DCSS swapping to be used in production until we're done testing it. Once we do recommend it, quite frankly it is supported as well. And when it's tested and supported, yes: run it in production then! I did not state that I do not want to look at performance data in the end, but I do not want to publish results from my simple initial measurements on development code. I want to wait for our performance group to finish their professional measurements. As I indicated in earlier posting, both our theory about how things work as well as our measurements we have so far indicate a very strong advantage in using DCSS for swapping over VDISK. Go pick up the code from kernel.org and measure it, or just stop complaining. By-the-way: Where is your proof for your statement? with kind regards Carsten Otte -- omnis enim res, quae dando non deficit, dum habetur et non datur, nondum habetur, quomodo habenda est ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
