DragonFly users List (threaded) for 2006-10
Re: Performance 4.x vs. 6.x
In my opinion what the FreeBSD team should have done considering the
number of developers and the approach they took towards SMP is to have 2
version of freebsd, one optimized for UP(perhaps 4.x) and 5.x for SMP.
Therefore 6.x would be an upgrade for UP optimized 4.x and 7.x upgrade
for optimized SMP.
I have to say that I agree with most of DT comments regarding the state of
FreeBSD5+, after having watched the progress (or lack there of) for over
<snip>�Maybe its just time for the entire FreeBSD team
to come out of its world of delusion and come to
terms with what every real-life user of FreeBSD
knows: In how ever many years of development,
there is still no good reason to use anything
other than FreeBSD 4.x except that 4.x doesn't
support a lot of newer harder.�
It seems that the complexity (and pollution) of the code base has
increased with each release. With this the developers that are able to
track down and fix bugs seem �few and far between� with the overall
complexity of the code base (the ULE scheduler, current problems with the
threading model, etc). I wish that 4.X was still supported in a way too,
until DF had a fully threaded network stack (that does seem to be a ways
off yet). When this is accomplished, there probably will not be much
reason to run any of the other flavors of BSD like DT mentioned�.
My day job I am involved with sys admin and dB admin on large
multiprocessor HPUX systems running 11.11 and Oracle 10gR2. I am very
impressed with the amount of work that has been done with DF given the
relatively few number of developers, and resources compared to FreeBSD.
I look forward to what will be accomplished in the next year with great