On 12/16/07, Mike Miller <mbmiller at taxa.epi.umn.edu> wrote: > On Sun, 16 Dec 2007, steve ulrich wrote: > > > i think the real irony in this thread is that ubuntu makes the dogs > > breakfast of linux more like freebsd in its operational elegance. > > > > fwiw - there are several things about freebsd's kernel which are > > definitely nicer than what's available on linux. notably in the > > networking realm. > > > > - 10GE optimizations w/TCP segment offload (linux might have this now) > > - SCTP - admittedly of niche interest, but this just works on freebsd and doesn't DIY brain surgery > > - soft updates for filesystem updates > > - pluggable network stack w/netgraph > > - kernel queues > > - accept filters > > - partial support for pf (which is just good enough to keep you from going to openbsd given how nice pf is.) > > I have to admit that I don't know what those things are. Would they > affect user experience? If so, how? It sounds like maybe some of the > differences affect network speed, but I guess that wouln't make much > difference for most users unless they were moving large files or > collections of files on a NFS. these aren't of widespread interest outside the realm of server applications or networking geeks. i.e.: the average user reading email or running applications won't care a bit about this stuff. the guy running a large production server with a lot of traffic on it, does. the guy debugging something on a relatively latency free lab network that needs to debug something that manifests itself in lossy networks or wants to shim something in the stack, does like this stuff. these are kernel elements which most folks (or workstation users) don't care about . -- steve ulrich (sulrich at botwerks.*)