Quoting Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (from Mon, 16 Oct 2006 19:00:54 +0100):
On 16/10/06, Mark Kirkwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
He might have got further by volunteering to create and supply profiles
for those specific workloads that were faster in 4.x than 6.x on UP
machinery etc... i.e. help make 6.x better rather than discourage the
development team (whose efforts are much appreciated by the rest of us
that are happily using 6.x...)
I recently ordered some servers from a datacentre on lease, specs were
UP p4 2.8ghz gig of ddr2 ram and sata hd, intel lan card. None of the
servers would boot in freebsd 6.x, they booted in freebsd 4.x but
needed a pata controller, they only worked properly in freebsd 5.x.
What's the Problem Report number of your bug report? Does it contain
the error message of the problem (if there's one), a detailed
description of the hardware, and anything else what may be
interesting to know about this situation?
It seems their are 2 major problems with freebsd at the moment (1) is
the hardware support is still way behind both linux and windows and
its very frustrating in the amount of datacentres that dont support
freebsd. and (2) the uniprocessor performance remains below par.
What's the PR number of your report where you describe under which
specific load (and how to produce/simulate this load) it doesn't
perform as fast as other operating systems?
Bye,
Alexander.
--
MSDOS is not dead, it just smells that way.
-- Henry Spencer
http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
