Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 11:28:17 +0930 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Lanny Baron <lnb@freedomtc.com> Cc: Noemie Buzaglo <nbuzaglo@mrs.com>, questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SMP & RAID Message-ID: <20000425112817.B26934@freebie.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.000424082520.lnb@freebsdsystems.com> References: <20000424181548.E12676@freebie.lemis.com> <XFMail.000424082520.lnb@freebsdsystems.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday, 24 April 2000 at 8:25:20 -0400, Lanny Baron wrote: > On 24-Apr-00 Greg Lehey wrote: >> On Monday, 24 April 2000 at 2:46:26 -0400, Lanny Baron wrote: >>> On 24-Apr-00 Greg Lehey wrote: >>>> On Sunday, 23 April 2000 at 2:27:42 -0400, Lanny Baron wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> Can I get some information with respect to SNP and how well FreeBSD can >>>>> handle up to 8 processors. >>>> >>>> You mean SMP (symmetrical multiprocessing)? It depends on what you >>>> want to do. The big limitation is the giant kernel lock which only >>>> allows one processor to run in kernel mode at any one time. Depending >>>> on your application, this may make no difference at all, or it may >>>> completely bog it down. >>>> >>>>> Would anyone know what RAID cards are supported. >>>> >>>> Take a look at the release notes, for example >>>> http://www.freebsd.org/releases/4.0R/notes.html. >>>> >>>>> Someone sent me mail saying that only Vinum will work. >>>> >>>> Don't rely on "someone". >>> >>> Yes sorry it is SMP. Typo. >>> As for what type of application might require multiple cpu's, I >>> would think large database applications. >> >> We've done some comparisons with Solaris in this area recently. They >> show that we have a long way to go to catch up with Solaris, and we're >> planning to do some work on it. At the moment, I wouldn't recommend >> FreeBSD SMP for database applications. >> >>> I know for a fact that a certain company with very large database >>> bogs the entire network down for them. They run AIX and have several >>> AS400's. A question then arises as to the claims of company's that >>> sell systems and offer up to 8 CPU's. If FreeBSD cannot utilize the >>> processing power, how can Linux? >> >> As a followup to the Mindcraft benchmarks, Linux has given more >> attention to kernel locking than we have. Don't count on them being >> behind us. >> >>> This Kernel lock you speak of, is there anyway around it? >> >> Sure, it's a SMOP (Simple Matter Of Programming). It took Sun about 5 >> years to get where they are now. Don't expect us to be any better. > > I fail to understand why FreeBSD would not want to pursue large > corporate users. If it is what you say (SMOP..) then why doesn't one > of the programmers for FreeBSD get SMP up to par with other systems? This was supposed to be ironical. It's a lot of work, as should be evident by the fact that it took Sun 5 years with a large team of programmers. > The answer provided does not demonstrate FreeBSD as being a > commercially viable solution against other systems, which is > contrary to what we believe. To be blunt, sucks. Well, we can discuss the terminology but yes, we're not happy about it either. > Greg, as you are not only a genius in his own right, you are a lover > of FreeBSD! AS the saying goes "if it's not broken, BREAK it and fix > it" I wouldn't go along with that one. > There must be some secret here, if MS is using FBSD for hotmail and > Yahoo! is using it for web. One processor to deliver all that? Well, per system. Each of these companies has several thousand machines. Greg -- When replying to this message, please copy the original recipients. For more information, see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000425112817.B26934>