On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 11:27:19PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In a message dated 9/29/04 7:02:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > >See the Early Adopter's Guide that was distributed with 5.2.1, or just > >don't worry about it and update to 5.3 which has vastly better network > >performance. > > > >Kris > I'll post some numbers after trying it. But its pretty frightening to think > that one release has such major changes. Sounds like (yet another) > crapshoot. I'd have hoped that 5.whatever would be better than 4.anything > simply as a matter of course. But 4.9 is slower than 4.7 and I can't > help but worry that its just all downhill from here on. To think that its > taken > 18 months to get to be more than twice as slow as what was before is > pretty discouraging. Nor can I have even the slightest bit of confidence that > something so different than the previous release is going to be as "stable" > as everyone seems to be claiming.
Uh..you've obviously not read any documentation and just blindly charged into 5.2.1 expecting it to be something it's documented not to be. Sorry, pal, but that's your fault, not ours, and throwing around random assertions now just makes you look silly. If you'd read the release documentation you'd understand the history of the 5.x branch and the current status of it (including, specifically, why networking on 5.3 will perform much better than 5.2.1 and even 4.x on SMP systems). Perhaps at this point you should go and do that, and avoid yourself any further embarrassment. Kris
pgp7wjVrQrE39.pgp
Description: PGP signature
