On 2008-Nov-03 00:34:47 +0100, Ivan Voras [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/10/31 Giorgos Keramidas [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The difference between the best and the worst is 247 context switches
(total, not per second).
It looks like it's probably worth pushing the limit up to 8 MB when we
have lots of
On Mon, 3 Nov 2008 18:58:18 +1100, Peter Jeremy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2008-Nov-03 00:34:47 +0100, Ivan Voras [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/10/31 Giorgos Keramidas [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The difference between the best and the worst is 247 context switches
(total, not per second).
It looks
On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 12:34:47AM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote:
It looks like it's probably worth pushing the limit up to 8 MB when we
have lots of memory :)
Yes, it's an improvement, but who will ever notice? :)
Is even the improvement from 64KB to 1MB even measurable? I mean on
anything but
On Thu, 30.10.2008 at 14:05:58 +, Ivan Voras wrote:
Author: ivoras
Date: Thu Oct 30 14:05:57 2008
New Revision: 184471
URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/184471
Log:
Teach cat(1) and cp(1) to use a larger buffer if enough memory is present
in the system. A simple
