Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 17:41:13 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com> Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: general speed differences between 4.1.1-RELEASE and 4.3-RELEASE Message-ID: <3B183629.228BB678@mindspring.com> References: <20010601190853.C76811-100000@achilles.silby.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mike Silbersack wrote: > > On Fri, 1 Jun 2001, Terry Lambert wrote: > > > First of all, they do not "run circles" around FreeBSD; > > they kill the virgin reliability on the alter of the > > bloody god Benchmark. > > Ok, Terry, you've made it clear that you hate IDE, you > hate linux, and you pretty much hate everything other > than soft-updates. Where did I say I hate IDE? I *do* think manufacturers should implement to the spec., however. In limited use scenarios, it's perfectly adequate. For example, a single user machine, a machine that gets wiped and reset a lot anyway, or using it as a really large boot floppy that doesn't really put it into the latency path after boot. I would consider using it on a server, with write caching disabled, of course, if I could guarantee that all of the drives I was going to use supported tagged command queues. Where did I say I hate Linux? I have code in Linux. Where did I say I love soft updates? It has value, but there are some grave architectural concerns which I've raised over the years, and which remain unaddressed to this day. Quit trying to put words in my mouth to make you look like a wronged reasonable person arguing with an unreasonable one. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3B183629.228BB678>