Performance 4.x vs. 6.x

[Mark Kirkwood]

Mark Linimon wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2006 at 02:01:08PM -0400, Michael Butler wrote:
>> For everyone's benefit then, please feel free to submit your patches
>> along with your technical analysis.
> 
> I think his best bet is a fork, instead.  Then he can tell all the people
> that volunteer to work on _his_ project exactly what to do, and see how
> far he gets with that approach.
> 
>

He might have got further by volunteering to create and supply profiles 
for those specific workloads that were faster in 4.x than 6.x on UP 
machinery etc... i.e. help make 6.x better rather than discourage the 
development team (whose efforts are much appreciated by the rest of us 
that are happily using 6.x...)

regards

Mark