RE: Any serious production servers yet?

[Danial Thom <danial_thom@xxxxxxxxx>]

--- talon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> Danial Thom wrote:
> 
> >
> > 
> > That is the "Wall" for people who are on real
> > networks. You could always count on the wall
> > advancing as our buddies at AMD and Intel
> > increased the GHZ. Now we're going sideways,
> and
> > many can't afford to have the wall regress to
> > accommodate smoother audio performance.
> 
> Danial
> 
> this is the wall for *you* and only for you. Do
> you want to know the truth
> for me? I could not care less if you can route
> gigabit links with BSD
> and filter them with pf. If i was in the
> situation to do that i would buy 
> dedicated hardware. But i care very much that
> the software i am using runs
> smoothly, and for that several processors give
> a very considerable bonus.
> With *my* present needs  FreeBSD, DragonFly and
>  Linux give a 
> very good experience. There are certainly far
> more machines running tomcat
> or jboss servers with a lot of threads which
> greatly and immediately benefit 
> from dual cores or more, than commodity
> machines used to do the job of
> dedicated hardware.
> And yes, as Kris said, jemalloc works well at
> present on FreeBSD.
> 

Yeah, well the French don't care about much of
anything now, do they? :)

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com