Mike Hoskins wrote:
>
> This isn't a comment meant to contribute to the overcommit holy war
> (opinion mode: I think FreeBSD should overcommit, or at worst have a
> sysctl and default to overcommit - admins who don't want overcommit can
> then hang themselves), but we have to be a wee bit careful when throwing
> load averages around...
>
> I've seen FreeBSD boxes virtually unuseable with 3-4 loads, and Solaris
> boxes still chugging away at 5+... Perhaps 'load average' is being
> calculated a wee bit differently.
I think that would rather be a function of the memory footprint of
the workload. The message said memory was increased because Solaris
was overloaded with _swapping_. The load itself isn't really of much
importance in this case.
Since Solaris does not overcommit, it needs (much) more memory than
FreeBSD would. Thus, changing to FreeBSD and upgrading the memory at
the same time is sure likely to give the impressive results
described.
Solaris is not a bad operating system. It's just misguided. :-)
--
Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS)
d...@newsguy.com
d...@freebsd.org
"Your usefulness to my realm ended the day you made it off Hustaing
alive."
-- Sun Tzu Liao to his ex-finacee, Isis Marik
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
