Re: Performance 4.x vs. 6.x
If you see/grep Danial Thom in FreeBSD related, consider this: http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/88q1/13785.8.html http://amasci.com/weird/flamer.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flame_war My personal fav' is the first link... How do we know that 'DT' even exists? Hmmm. DT - S, go away for you do not exist. RB. On 10/16/06, Danial Thom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- Mark Linimon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Oct 15, 2006 at 02:01:08PM -0400, > Michael Butler wrote: > > For everyone's benefit then, please feel free > to submit your patches > > along with your technical analysis. > > I think his best bet is a fork, instead. Then > he can tell all the people > that volunteer to work on _his_ project exactly > what to do, and see how > far he gets with that approach. > > As an extra-special bonus, since it's the BSD > license, he can start with > whatever version of FreeBSD he finds most meets > his needs. > > Even better, with his own project, he can then > redirect all his postings > there and leave the rest of us in peace. > > Until then, I think I'll watch out for any > flying monkeys. I consider > their existance equally probable. > > mcl Why do I need to start a project? Matt Dillon is already doing it. One thing that Matt has proved is that IQ isn't cumulative. Because hes doing on his own what an entire team of FreeBSD "engineers" can't do. But hey, you're not getting paid, so I guess we shouldn't expect anything good. Bravo for trying guys. We appreciate your wasted efforts. I'm not nearly as concerned about the project at this point. Dfly will be usable before freebsd, and at least we know there's someone that knows what they're doing over there. What concerns me is the lying to all of the small businessman out there. People wasting their money on hardware that freebsd can't utilize. And you clowns telling them how great it is. Its just plain dishonest. DT __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" -- Why use Gmail? Cause HOTMAIL SUCKS! If you *STILL* are using HOTMAIL you only have to ask yourself "Why?" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Performance 4.x vs. 6.x
--- Mark Linimon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Oct 15, 2006 at 02:01:08PM -0400, > Michael Butler wrote: > > For everyone's benefit then, please feel free > to submit your patches > > along with your technical analysis. > > I think his best bet is a fork, instead. Then > he can tell all the people > that volunteer to work on _his_ project exactly > what to do, and see how > far he gets with that approach. > > As an extra-special bonus, since it's the BSD > license, he can start with > whatever version of FreeBSD he finds most meets > his needs. > > Even better, with his own project, he can then > redirect all his postings > there and leave the rest of us in peace. > > Until then, I think I'll watch out for any > flying monkeys. I consider > their existance equally probable. > > mcl Why do I need to start a project? Matt Dillon is already doing it. One thing that Matt has proved is that IQ isn't cumulative. Because hes doing on his own what an entire team of FreeBSD "engineers" can't do. But hey, you're not getting paid, so I guess we shouldn't expect anything good. Bravo for trying guys. We appreciate your wasted efforts. I'm not nearly as concerned about the project at this point. Dfly will be usable before freebsd, and at least we know there's someone that knows what they're doing over there. What concerns me is the lying to all of the small businessman out there. People wasting their money on hardware that freebsd can't utilize. And you clowns telling them how great it is. Its just plain dishonest. DT __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Performance 4.x vs. 6.x
--- NOC Meganet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Saturday 14 October 2006 17:13, Danial Thom > wrote: > > The fact that a processor has 2 cores doesn't > > mean you have to use them, just like a MB > with 2 > > sockets doesn't need both to be used. If the > OS > > is faster with 1 processor than 2, then you > only > > use one of the cores. The concept that you > have > > to fire up both of them just because they're > > there is just stupid. > > > > you also can pick yourself in one eye and still > can see with the other or you > can cut one leg and hop around on the other, > great ideas you have Wait, this is interesting. So even though you can demonstrate that for most large networking tasks 2 cores is actually slower than 1, you still use 2 cores? Yikes. All of the clowns that called themselves networking gurus running MP systems in 4.x continue to be clowns in general. I guess if you don't understand the concepts, then you have no chance of every being any good at anything > > so then your smart tip is running 4.11-UP on > Tyan S4882D with 4 Opterons 8xx > dual-core? mhhh ... No, my smart tip is to buy hardware that suits the operating system and the task. I can get better performance than you with a single 2.8Ghz opteron running 4.x for $1000 less per system. If you use that hardware with Freebsd, you are a clown, pure and simple, big red nose and all. You just have no idea what you're doing and your wasting either your or your company's money. If you bought that hardward anticipating that 7+ or 8+ or whatever they're saying now might be able to use it thats one thing, but wasting money on big honking hardware that isn't faster than less expensive hardware is just plain stupid. > > > Freebsd 4.11 is dead because of a stupid > decision > > but people who thought that MP would have > been > > working 2 years ago. They continue to not be > able > > to promise any scalability in the foreseeable > > future, so maybe they need to revisit the > > decision. > > > > yes! and I also prefere horses with wagons > instead of red V12 cars and even > this guys know that horses are better and put a > horse into their logo ... The fallacy of your analogy is that the red cars can beat the horse and buggy in a race. Unfortunately, FreeBSD 6.x with 4 processors can't beat 4.x with one, which is the entire point of this thread. DT __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Performance 4.x vs. 6.x
--- Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 01:34:36PM -0700, > Danial Thom wrote: > > Yeah, bury your head in the sand as always. > > > > Its been proven over and over. Robert Watson > has > > admitted many times that 6.x is not as fast > as > > 4.x uniprocessor > > FOR CERTAIN TASKS. Your (misquoted) claim is > demonstrably false in > generality, which is what makes 6.x so useful > to many people. Bicycles are useful to many people, but that doesn't make a case against discontinuing building automobiles. Unfortunately, the "certain tasks" that Freebsd 4.x is better at are squid, apache and networking applications, which are the only viable reasons to use the OS commercially. I've yet to hear 1 (thats *one*) commercial vendor who built a product on 4.x claim to move to 5 or 6 because of its superior performance. The only ones I know that have switched did so because of some device they needed or SATA support. I continue to be baffled by the following after 4 years of complete failure to make MP perform. Its almost like the entire user base is drugged or something. Linux 2.6 is not suitable for uniprocessor, nor is FreeBSD 6. The difference is that Linux scales with MP, and FreeBSD doesn't. So the case to keep 4.x as an option is an easy one to make. DT > > If you can one day get this through your head > and stop posting false > claims, people may eventually stop calling you > a troll. I hope so, > because you might actually have something to > contribute if only you > can learn to properly qualify your statements. > > Kris > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
