Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2004 14:01:09 -0700 From: "Paul Smith" <stork@QNET.COM> To: <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Microkernel Performance: FreeBSD versus Darwin Message-ID: <200409042056.i84Kudsk021327@cello.qnet.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C49287.ABCDFBA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Theoretically the microkernel of Darwin should create overheads harming the performance. Has anybody seen an actual study comparing the performance of Darwin and FreeBSD? DEC's Tru64UNIX used a microkernel, but the Alpha hardware was so superior for its time that any loss of performance could have gone unnoticed. Similarly Tera runs on supercomputers that can absorb a little extra overhead. Does anybody know of any serious benefit arising from the microkernel? Or is Darwin simply Steve Jobs' passion to bring back NeXT? Paul Smith semenbank@yahoo.com --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Checked. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.749 / Virus Database: 501 - Release Date: 9/1/2004 ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C49287.ABCDFBA0--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200409042056.i84Kudsk021327>