From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 16 00:04:57 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA42616A403 for ; Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:04:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jeffrey@goldmark.org) Received: from out5.smtp.messagingengine.com (out5.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A496013C489 for ; Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:04:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jeffrey@goldmark.org) Received: from out1.internal (unknown [10.202.2.149]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 403B91F87F0; Thu, 15 Mar 2007 20:04:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heartbeat1.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.160]) by out1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 15 Mar 2007 20:04:56 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: JvMgqDQnY0X/Fi3v1QwMHLdfvip5+C/rNGe0dJvtT9Sh 1174003495 Received: from [10.1.10.136] (n114.ewd.goldmark.org [72.64.118.114]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D8891EAFF; Thu, 15 Mar 2007 20:04:54 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <45F9C6ED.2010306@wcborstel.com> References: <45F9C6ED.2010306@wcborstel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <707D1CE0-F7E3-4D29-A755-3AB7495FB66C@goldmark.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Jeffrey Goldberg Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 19:04:51 -0500 To: Jorn Argelo X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2) Cc: youshi10@u.washington.edu, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Optimizationn questions? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:04:57 -0000 On Mar 15, 2007, at 5:21 PM, Jorn Argelo wrote: > youshi10@u.washington.edu wrote: >> On Thu, 15 Mar 2007, Danny Pansters wrote: >> I know that this has been discussed a few times before, but >> IMO running a slightly stripped down kernel (i.e. custom, not >> GENERIC) actually proves to be helpful in increasing boot times >> (if options were added statically) and compile times if [(# of >> options added) < (# of options in GENERIC)]. > I can confirm this too. I noticed on both desktop and servers the > boot time can be decreased by stripping the kernel configuration of > stuff you don't need. I don't have any hard facts to prove this but > this is what my personal experience is. me, too. -j