Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 18 Feb 2011 17:27:29 -0600
From:      Adam Vande More <amvandemore@gmail.com>
To:        Jeremy Chadwick <freebsd@jdc.parodius.com>
Cc:        freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org, stable@freebsd.org, "Kenneth D. Merry" <ken@freebsd.org>, Dmitry Morozovsky <marck@rinet.ru>
Subject:   Re: mps(4) driver (LSI 6Gb SAS) commited to stable/8
Message-ID:  <AANLkTikzfvgwR2GMXuhfn_daOai7gUo-_kxi%2BUbZzb_D@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20110218231306.GA69028@icarus.home.lan>
References:  <20110218164209.GA77903@nargothrond.kdm.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1102190104280.14809@woozle.rinet.ru> <20110218225204.GA84087@nargothrond.kdm.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1102190203470.14809@woozle.rinet.ru> <20110218231306.GA69028@icarus.home.lan>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Jeremy Chadwick
<freebsd@jdc.parodius.com>wrote:

> No -- /dev/urandom maybe, but not /dev/random.  /dev/urandom will also
> induce significantly higher CPU load than /dev/zero will.  Don't forget
> that ZFS is a processor-centric (read: no offloading) system.
>

/dev/urandom is linked to /dev/random.  Is there some other difference I'm
not aware of, or are you confusing it with Linux's random?


-- 
Adam Vande More



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTikzfvgwR2GMXuhfn_daOai7gUo-_kxi%2BUbZzb_D>