Performance problem since updating from 6.0-RELEASE to 6.0-STABLE last friday

[Nate Lawson]

Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
>>>>>>On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 12:06:12 -0800
>>>>>>Nate Lawson <nate at root.org> said:
> 
> 
> nate> Thank you for tracking this down.  It is interesting that BIF is 
> nate> heavyweight while BST is not.  I guess that is expected behavior by OEMs 
> nate> which only test on Windows and so not everyone makes BIF simple.  On my 
> nate> laptops, BIF is as fast as BST.
> 
> You are welcome.  My laptops are also fast enough for BIF.  I
> remembered that iwasaki-san grouched at the heavyweight of BIF when he
> was writing cmbat support.
> 
> nate> I don't like the patch approach (changing the API), however.  Let me 
> nate> look at it and commit a fix that doesn't change the API.
> 
> Yes, I didn't feel satisfaction with my patch, too.  So, I anticipated
> that you say so. :-)

My patch has been committed, tested, and MFCd.  Thank you for your 
debugging help, Umemoto-san.

-- 
Nate