On 7/12/05, Random <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Eliminating tuneables is a *silly* thing to do, even if the process of tuning > is 'automatic'. As OS kernels and the systems they control become *far* more > complex, giving the system access to dynamic tuning is a *good* thing to do. > Systems undergo dynamic usage - at one point during the day, network load > might be far more intense than at others, and the process load also > fluctuates.
How is it silly? As an admin, I don't want to know or care about "tunables". The system should be smart enough to Do the Right Thing(TM), and when it doesn't, it should be considered a bug for most tunables in my opinion. As they mentioned, they're not really eliminating *all* tunables, some of these are just moving to other places in the system as configuration options instead of system-wide things. The shm tunable are a great example of things that I never want to deal with... -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ opensolaris-code mailing list opensolaris-code@opensolaris.org https://opensolaris.org:444/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
