Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles; site uokvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uokvax!jab
From: jab@uokvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.unix
Subject: "The XXX is slow!" - (nf)
Message-ID: <6100036@uokvax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 13-Jul-84 20:06:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: uokvax.6100036
Posted: Fri Jul 13 20:06:00 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 16-Jul-84 07:10:25 EDT
Lines: 22
Nf-ID: #N:uokvax:6100036:000:855
Nf-From: uokvax!jab    Jul 13 19:06:00 1984

#N:uokvax:6100036:000:855
uokvax!jab    Jul 13 19:06:00 1984

I just spoke with a couple of people who poo-poo'ed an article on
a machine being VERY SLOW because "they undoubtedly had it configured
poorly."

That's silly, but from now on, if you submit an article saying "the
XXX machine seems to be a good price, but the {disk,terminal handler,
tape,bus,cpu,...} is too slow" PLEASE include the following:
	i) A brief configuration, such as the compile-time options
	   like "maxusers" on a 4.X system or "buffers" on a System V
	   system or "NBUF" on a Research system (and the like)
	ii) The simplest benchmark program that demonstrates your point.

I am referring to Ron Natalie's article, but I've seen this several
times. Ron's mistake was giving anybody an "out" of any kind. (If I
had a nickel for every time I made that mistake, I'd not have to worry
about buying Lottery tickets.)

	Jeff Bowles
	Lisle, IL