On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 2:50 PM, Brad Tilley <b...@16systems.com> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Donald Allen <donaldcal...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Certainly I agree with you that a blazingly fast but unstable and/or >> insecure system isn't worth much in most, if any, settings. On the >> other hand, a rock-solid, secure system that simply doesn't deliver >> the computations at the needed rate isn't worth much either. > > Can you cite a specific case where OpenBSD fails to meet your > computational need in detail? I'd like to see a real-world example if > you have one.
I don't, and many times we don't have the luxury of having such examples or data. I'm in a different kind of real-world situation: I'm setting up a database server on a 4-core machine that is going to carry a heavy load -- it's performance will be critical to the success of the project -- and I need to choose the OS that gives me the best chance of meeting my performance and stability requirements. Since the database will be large, I'd really like to get this right the first time and don't have the time to do experiments/benchmarking to guide me. That's why I'm asking questions, hopefully to improve the probability of getting this right. /Don > > Thanks, > > Brad
