On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 14:31:55 -0800 <matt...@phoronix.com> wrote: > Thanks for the comment Arnaud. For comparative benchmarking > on [1]Phoronix.com, Michael inva configuration 'in the way the > developers or production'. This is by rule. However, i poor > scores on be 'it should be tuned, is configured for a diffe The > response from us to this comes in two forms. &nb 1) If it is the > wrong workload for the platform, do a public pos explaining and > analysing the results. Highlighting the rationale fo r the > concious reduction in performance (ie: journaling filesystems with > ba filesystem integrity 2) If tuning can have a material impact > on the results, post a t uning guide with step by step and > rationale. Ie: educate the communit Michael and I have had many > discussions with vendors an on this. In almost all cases, the > vendor has either cha default configuration or accepted the results > as valid. As guide, Micha comparison. To dat offer. In part, > thi public, but that is more of a result of a one sided d party > external to a particular community (with a healthy tou > journalisticly pumped compare & contrast). For the FreeBSD > community, who else outside of the FreeBSD community actually runs > public c Matthew
Not really related to the discussion on hand, but the above about the most unreadable email I am yet to read on the public mailing list. -- Alexander Kabaev
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
