Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 12 Jul 1999 15:41:01 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Doug <Doug@gorean.org>
To:        Alex Le Heux <alexlh@p.funk.org>
Cc:        kris@airnet.net, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: 3C905 versus Intel Etherexpress PRO/100?!
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.05.9907121539280.8174-100000@dt054n86.san.rr.com>
In-Reply-To: <199907122230.AAA25713@p.funk.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Alex Le Heux wrote:

> We're talking about a 2% difference in cpu utilisation here. Is that
> even statistically significant? 

	Yes. I have more than one environment where every cpu cycle is
precious, either due to long-term load or due to the need for fast
recovery from load bursts. 

	A fundamental design element for a server OS (as opposed to a
desktop OS) is to always assume that *every* cpu cycle is valuable. 

Doug
-- 
On account of being a democracy and run by the people, we are the only
nation in the world that has to keep a government four years, no matter
what it does.
                -- Will Rogers



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9907121539280.8174-100000>