On Thursday 30 June 2005 20:37, Tony Wicks wrote: > ENOUGH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > NO MORE PLEASE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Alright - I'll shut up :-) I just got annoyed by Bryan insisting on things he's clearly wrong about... I'll just do the same what Chris and several others on this list did and filter out Bryan's posts... Too bad I'll be missing the good parts where he makes great sense but at least I don't have to sit here crinching when Bryan goes on with his chest beating... Peter.
Re: Hot swap CPU -- "build" is not a good CPU benchmark
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: Hot swap CPU -- "build" is not a good CPU benchmark
- From: loony at loonybin.org (Peter Arremann)
- Date: Fri Jul 1 01:00:12 2005
- In-reply-to: <42C4904C.6060604@xxxxxxxxx>
- References: <17694231.1120178023666.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <42C4904C.6060604@xxxxxxxxx>
- References:
- Re: Hot swap CPU -- "build" is not a good CPU benchmark
- From: Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx>
- Re: Hot swap CPU -- "build" is not a good CPU benchmark
- From: Tony Wicks
- Re: Hot swap CPU -- "build" is not a good CPU benchmark
- Prev by Date: [OT] SPARC platforms -- WAS: Hot swap CPU
- Next by Date: Good, concurrent I/O design in a server -- WAS: SPARC platforms
- Previous by thread: Re: Hot swap CPU -- "build" is not a good CPU benchmark
- Next by thread: Vote for CentOS - AGAIN :)
- Index(es):
 |