Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 21:04:13 +0200 From: Rainer Duffner <rainer@ultra-secure.de> To: FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Not to beat a dead horse, but ... Message-ID: <C89397B4-1D98-4D37-908E-08F2A4266128@ultra-secure.de> In-Reply-To: <5394F72E.4080306@m5p.com> References: <5394A848.7030609@m5p.com> <CAPS9%2BSuR=F2jCsp=%2BHvU3kaZvTtULZ5D%2BkX-1PZdmHd1RP1RSw@mail.gmail.com> <5394B80A.2030901@m5p.com> <20140608232203.GN31367@funkthat.com> <5394F72E.4080306@m5p.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
=09 Am 09.06.2014 um 01:52 schrieb George Mitchell <george+freebsd@m5p.com>: > On 06/08/14 19:22, John-Mark Gurney wrote: >> [...] it turns out that the electricity >> savings in a year, paid for the entire cost of the new switch... We >> were talking ~$250/year in savings, so, upgrading can end up saving >> you money... >>=20 > Thanks for the advice on what hardware I should run. But why should I > believe that upgrading to SMP and running with ULE will make my life > better? In fact, when I tried ULE + a six-core system + dnetc + make > buildworld, etc., a couple of years ago (I do have one SMP system), > the results were just as appalling compared to 4BSD as with a single > processor. =97 George I think a lot of progress has been made as compared to =84a couple of = years ago=93. I have no hard numbers to back that up, of course, because I don=92t = have a uniform work-load that I can throw different releases (and = kernels) at. In addition to that, older FreeBSD releases generally run on (much) = older hardware and thus I can=92t compare the performance directly. But I would hesitate to, in essence, call the results of the efforts of = the developers over the last years =84appalling=93. That said, you can still buy single-core systems and I actually run one: = an ALIX 2d13. And I think my Centrino-laptop is also single-core (but = it=92s from 2004=85). But the Alix runs pfSense, not FreeBSD. As such, the pfSense-project is = responsible for issuing patches (and does so). People running non-standard kernel for other reasons (VIMAGE comes to = mind) probably have a similar problem. AFAIK, you should be able to run a local freebsd-update server and build = the patches yourself. I just don=92t know if it will actually fix your problem out of the box = or what else would have to be done so that freebsd-update replaces the = kernel with the one from your custom freebsd-update server...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?C89397B4-1D98-4D37-908E-08F2A4266128>