From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST, HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 349aed4b for ; Sat, 1 Sep 2018 19:17:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id C5E0BA207E; Sun, 2 Sep 2018 05:17:23 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62671A1A6D; Sun, 2 Sep 2018 05:17:11 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ccc.com header.i=@ccc.com header.b=CDt/YDs3; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id EF2CEA1A6D; Sun, 2 Sep 2018 05:17:09 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-io0-f176.google.com (mail-io0-f176.google.com [209.85.223.176]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 837EBA1A20 for ; Sun, 2 Sep 2018 05:17:09 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-io0-f176.google.com with SMTP id l7-v6so13013241iok.6 for ; Sat, 01 Sep 2018 12:17:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ccc.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=MjzwBnmxTPTSiuXuNAx8D2vr5+dGpvmyAtJvQU3fkcg=; b=CDt/YDs3ZmzXkuUZvwBYzwqn8xytST35EjSM2gDenmPT1OwwyKyY0M9apfWLMD79Wi Imo7DegOTV3sLql+0/BF5KReG4lTM9L58mGLCW8pIxRipdCuieSsiKVVJz0NASNNy3hy iChNWA+uK5Mhi03YuVbDXcKn0RLmx1awl4u8M= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=MjzwBnmxTPTSiuXuNAx8D2vr5+dGpvmyAtJvQU3fkcg=; b=kA5OWvzHRnb4fNihYUyGa5aWV61uGrPfBrqSQFq736TgTpdEcQKOwTkTZMYUZzJ7By 9k1it536CV2CdA+biVI0phWoi+lhLUiCw3DlpcsTGFBEHYt0RaCPGdPiRkZEcDwSlHHV 7n9bK06TvLnlVCqlidiM4Qj2b8tUPl8xzF+YIP4+P6g6vWqv6HDdxD0qtcZXmAfs6xeL eqUcdbYGboa+c0R6ZCqBK334Tq4WENZTuQOiNWBxdW6IAnJiN5q1v66tad3D8Myq7t4S lVpCzPdLZZwUw+Kmpl3lzSWmdd2BSEY4MDoVrubb+4fDtyrcL2FZB19c2GFJ8zytD6/v C/UA== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51D0R9WZBjPNS75tUTgSh5eWXHzjcKlc8GN6x9AavtvLOhqbCCux NZ/5CULWEtzi8Fb/iaVpG1vBLQQ+Hi0pX5tOvSJyXabL X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdafuCbQmbfNfcTVFzV1b83EFAz0XqCMxx9PjaWGHQiwXdDiWlYN/6KPKpBKpXIh8cyFymWdHm8D4S5rTiD9wYU= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:9651:: with SMTP id y78-v6mr15921441iod.283.1535829428905; Sat, 01 Sep 2018 12:17:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20180901185053.GA20993@mcvoy.com> In-Reply-To: <20180901185053.GA20993@mcvoy.com> From: Clem Cole Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2018 15:16:42 -0400 Message-ID: To: Larry McVoy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008bb1d80574d42750" Subject: Re: [TUHS] UVM VM system X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: TUHS main list Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --0000000000008bb1d80574d42750 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Sep 1, 2018 at 2:51 PM Larry McVoy wrote: > So I just read this > > https://www.usenix.org/legacy/event/usenix99/full_papers/cranor/cranor.pd= f I remember that presentsation, it was exciting and very cool ;-) > > > and it looks encouraging. Apparently NetBSD is using it. Hmm - integrated/used it at one time ... but ... I'm not sure of that is still true of it it even really made it out. That was all happening when I was still hacking on Alphas (which was a long time ago). We'd need the active NetBSD folks to chime in on curent state. > Does anyone > > know if they are happy with it? > At the time (and I'm doing this by memory) the buffer cache stuff needed a rewrite which I thought FreeBSD did/was doing at the time. In those days, FreeBSD was within epislon on of Tru64 on Alpha performance and NetBSD had a ways to go. At the time, I gave a couple of Alphas to somebody in the UK (I've forgotten whom); who was going to redo it. > > Has FreeBSD considered this? > Last I knew, no. I was under the impression, the work FreeBSD did rewriting the Mach stuff paid off for them at the time. I have FreeBSD, OpenBSD and Linux (and Mac OSx) all running on my systems here. But the problem is that the HW is all over the map in termns of release date, so I'm not sure which is faster at this point. The *BSD systems are the easiest to admin and clean/simplest (which is why they only systems I have exposed is an OpenBSD box). But they have uses ;-) > > Has anyone benchmarked FreeBSD against NetBSD to see which is faster > for VM stuff? > My data was from those days, and FreeBSD was winning, but thats a >>long<< time ago. Lots of bits have been types into to the kernel of both systems, so you tell me, Clem =E1=90=A7 --0000000000008bb1d80574d42750 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Sat, Sep 1, 2018 at 2:51 PM Larry McVoy <lm@mcvoy.com> wrote:
= So I just read this

https://www.usenix.org/leg= acy/event/usenix99/full_papers/cranor/cranor.pdf
I = remember that presentsation, it was exciting and very cool ;-)

=C2=A0


and it looks encouraging.=C2=A0 Apparently NetBSD is using it.
=
Hmm - integrated/used it at one time ... but ... I'm not sure o= f that is still true of it it even really made it out.=C2=A0 That was all h= appening when I was still hacking on Alphas (which was a long time ago).=C2= =A0 =C2=A0We'd need the active NetBSD folks to chime in on curent state= .

=C2=A0
=C2=A0 D= oes anyone
=C2=A0
know if they are happy with it?
At the time (and I'm doing this by memory) the bu= ffer cache stuff needed a rewrite which I thought FreeBSD did/was doing at = the time.
In those days, FreeBSD was within epislon on of Tru64 on = Alpha performance and NetBSD had a ways to go.=C2=A0 At the time, I gave a = couple of Alphas to somebody in the UK (I've forgotten whom); who was g= oing to redo it.

=C2=A0

Has FreeBSD considered this?
Last I knew, no.=C2=A0= I was under the impression, the work FreeBSD did rewriting the Mach stuff = paid off for them at the time.=C2=A0 I have FreeBSD, OpenBSD and Linux (and= Mac OSx) all running on my systems here.=C2=A0 =C2=A0But the problem is th= at the HW is all over the map in termns of release date, so I'm not sur= e which is faster at this point.=C2=A0 =C2=A0The *BSD systems are the easie= st to admin and clean/simplest (which is why they only systems I have expos= ed is an OpenBSD box).=C2=A0 But they have uses ;-)

=C2= =A0

Has anyone benchmarked FreeBSD against NetBSD to see which is faster
for VM stuff?

=
My data was from those days, and FreeBSD= was winning, but thats a >>long<< time ago.=C2=A0 Lots of bits= have been types into to the kernel of both systems, so you tell me,
<= /div>

Clem=C2=A0
3D""=E1=90=A7
--0000000000008bb1d80574d42750--