Re: Performance 4.x vs. 6.x

2006-10-16 Thread Danial Thom


--- 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

2006-10-16 Thread RoBeRT B

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

2006-10-15 Thread Danial Thom


--- 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

2006-10-14 Thread Danial Thom


--- 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]