%Basically there are some applications and benchmarks for which FreeBSD uh, "benchmarks" only, until evidence is produced otherwise. Tuning for benchmarks has been around a long long time. People get worked up about this because the people who give out the money to buy the systems use benchmarks to decide whom to give the money to. It's really, really stupid to rely on generic benchmarks. But people do, anyway. So I guess whistle and some others should invest in tuning for the benchmarks. Like jupiter, eh? Or maybe Apple. But for the rest, I wouldn't panic. In fact, there's probably some interesting kernel architecture issues here. Let's hear them, now! If I wanted secrecy about architecture details there's a shitload less time consuming ways to do it then follow FreeBSD. Russell To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: All this and documentation too? ... Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: All this and documentation too?(... Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: All this and documentation too? ... Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: All this and documentation too? ... Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: All this and documentation too? ... Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: All this and documentation too?(... Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: ...) Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: ...) Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: ...) Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: ...) Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: ...) Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: ...) Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: ...) Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: ...) Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: ...) Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: ...) Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: ...) Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: ...) Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: ...) Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: ...) Anonymous
- Re: Microsoft performance (was: ...) Anonymous