At 02:15 PM 04/18/2001, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 01:17:03PM -0400, Dennis wrote:
> > At 01:12 PM 04/18/2001, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > >Hi,
> > >
> > >better back out SMPng real fast, otherwise you'll get into a
> > >flamewar with Dennis again ;)
> >
> > I just fear that "ng" will have the same negative connotations that
> "NT" did.
>
>Feel free to test it and contribute your bug reports to the
>developers. We make -current available for this reason, you know..
>
>Kris
No thanks. I treasure these tranquil days without endless race conditions,
lockups and undebuggable code. I see that the more stressful days approach.
I'll stick with single processor and count on my buddies at intel to raise
the bar by 75% every year without having to introduce the instability that
SMPng will undoubted suffer with for long periods.
A 1.5Ghz processor can outperform 2 fully saturated PCI buses, so its not
going to help much in the networking world, which is where I live.
Processing power is already exceeding the busses capabilities.
Its nice to have a processor for user space and one for kernel/interrupt
space, but going beyond that to seriously adulterate the OS to squeeze a
few extra cycles in a world where processors are jumping 20% in speed every
few months seems counterproductive. You dont put 2 engines in a car to make
it faster, you get a faster engine.
It seems that there is a lack of foresight here...you're losing a year or
more of engineering time and before SMPng is stablilized the IA-64 will be
out and most multiprocessor applications will be rushing to move over to that.
DB
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
