Re: different behaviour between 4.x and 5.x (ping response/disk io) [was Re: ]

2005-01-20 Thread Jochen Keil
stheg olloydson wrote: Glad to be of help. Raidframe had been ported to FBSD 5.x, but it was removed because kernel changes broke it, and no one volunteered to fix it. I think gvinum replaced vinum in 5.3 for the same reason. I don't use software raid, so I don't really know. It's a pity that raidf

Re: different behaviour between 4.x and 5.x (ping response/disk io) [was Re: ]

2005-01-19 Thread stheg olloydson
it was said > Just a few day ago i installed NetBSD 2.0 to make a final stroke to > my decision as i got this computer on the 16. of november. Main > advantage in my opinion is that raidframe performs better than vinum (at least > with my setup and with the tests i performed). There are some othe

Re: different behaviour between 4.x and 5.x (ping response/disk io) [was Re: ]

2005-01-19 Thread Jochen Keil
stheg olloydson wrote: (Sorry about the multiple posts. I somehow sent this without a subject line before.) Never mind. Nobody's perfect. ;) To sum up your problem, you tested "FreeBSD 5.3, NetBSD 2.0, FreeBSD 4.11 and an elder version of the Knoppix (Linux 2.4) CD" and found that FreeBSD 4.11RC2 h

Re: different behaviour between 4.x and 5.x (ping response/disk io) [was Re: ...

2005-01-17 Thread Freebsd0101
In a message dated 1/16/05 7:43:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >stheg > >P.S. (to the list in general) Why do all of the questions about FBSD >performance, especially 4.x vs 5.x, come from people posting from >Windows boxes? Theories? Because performance is a server issue a

Re: different behaviour between 4.x and 5.x (ping response/disk io) [was Re: ...

2005-01-17 Thread Freebsd0101
In a message dated 1/16/05 7:43:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >>Now i am really puzzled because i cannot understand why 4.x behaves >>relatively good compared to 5.x on this specific issue. Is there a >>good explanation or does one have to investigate this further? >Al

Re: different behaviour between 4.x and 5.x (ping response/disk io) [was Re: ]

2005-01-16 Thread Andrew P.
stheg wrote: P.S. (to the list in general) Why do all of the questions about FBSD performance, especially 4.x vs 5.x, come from people posting from Windows boxes? Theories? Cuz if you have freebsd on your desktop, you don't give a damn about its performance. It's just too great. And don't look at m

Re: different behaviour between 4.x and 5.x (ping response/disk io) [was Re: ]

2005-01-16 Thread stheg olloydson
(Sorry about the multiple posts. I somehow sent this without a subject line before.) it was said: >Now i am really puzzled because i cannot understand why 4.x behaves >relatively good compared to 5.x on this specific issue. Is there a >good explanation or does one have to investigate this furth