Re: "swap" partition leads to instability?

On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 1:19 PM, jb wrote: > Fred Morcos gmail.com> writes: > > > .. > > The improvement effect can be > > noticed on large inputs. These algorithms will most probably perform > quite > > badly on small inputs. > > I think your conce

Re: "swap" partition leads to instability?

On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:42 PM, jb wrote: > Follow up comment. > > It has been pointed out to me that there is Varnish software taking > advantage > of system VMM and swap space. > > Well, there are cache-oblivious algorithms that perform as well, and so > they > make the above (disk access mode

Re: Anatomy of Perfomance tests

On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > what i would like to see too is how these systems compare on such test: > > - run lots of heavy disk I/O tests, many different in the same time, > including ones doing many writes to different places. > > - turn off power while doing this,

Re: Anatomy of Perfomance tests

On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > Most probably all filesystems were used with defaults. > > MAYBE softupdates, but not even sure for this. Compare this to linux which > is async-like. Comparing with UFS+async would be more fair. > > Still - FreeBSD default MAXPHYS in para

Re: New to FreeBSD - Some questions

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> I'm quite new to FreeBSD too (RHEL/Fedora background), and am most >> impressed with it so far. > > > rather huge difference. > > >> Secondly (and probably stating the obvious), the handbook >> >>

Re: Flaming mailing lists (was Re: Why Clang)

And I just want to add I'm a gay Marxist atheist and I represent the accusations leveled in that other post...we have feelings too!!! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscrib

Re: Flaming mailing lists (was Re: Why Clang)

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Jonathan McKeown wrote: > On Wednesday 20 June 2012 12:59:51 Stephen Cook wrote: >> On 6/19/2012 4:06 PM, Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote: > > [snip childish invective] > >> I'm a relative newcomer. Are the FreeBSD mailing lists always this >> flame-y? I realize

New to FreeBSD - Some questions

Hello all, I am new to FreeBSD, coming from a GNU/Linux background (most comfortable with Archlinux). I compiled a series of questions I would like to ask in different areas and categories. Should I send them all in a single email message or should I split them by subject/topic into different emai

Re: Why Clang

I am also a newcomer and I agree with Stephen. But I guess the only way is to simply ignore those who make such statements. I don't see much benefit in arguing or reasoning with them. On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Stephen Cook wrote: > On 6/19/2012 4:06 PM, Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote:

Re: CLANG vs GCC tests of fortran/f2c program

The answer is: 1. gcc will still be available through the ports system. 2. The move to clang/llvm as a default compiler will reduce the amount of GPL code in the base system, eventually reducing distribution issues (especially for 3rd parties). 3. clang/llvm provides better error and warning messa

Re: Why Clang

I don't see much fruit coming out of that conversation anymore. On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote: > >> GPL protects the freedom of the programmer who licensed his >> code under those licenses: He wants it to be free for use, >> but not to be turned into closed

Re: Why Clang

I would also guess that the base system is stuck with gcc ~4.1 due to the GPLv3-ization of later gcc version. Is that correct? On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Michel Talon wrote: > David Brodbeck said: >> Another way of looking at it is after 25 years of optimization GCC is >> unable to beat a n

Re: rm returns 0 although directory didn't exist and wasn't deleted ?

wrote: > I always assumed -f would only force removal, not modify the exit code. > > No bug then, working as intended, all good. > > > > Cheers > > On 6/19/12 3:43 PM, Fred Morcos wrote: >> You used -f which means rm will not complain if a file or directory >&g

Re: rm returns 0 although directory didn't exist and wasn't deleted ?

You used -f which means rm will not complain if a file or directory cannot be deleted (or does not exist in the first place). On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Damien Fleuriot wrote: > I've stumbled upon this *so weird* behaviour. > > > > # ls -la /var/tmp/stunnel/ > ls: /var/tmp/stunnel/: No such