From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Dec 13 08:14:04 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09005106564A
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 08:14:04 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from daniel@digsys.bg)
Received: from smtp-sofia.digsys.bg (smtp-sofia.digsys.bg [193.68.3.230])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8306A8FC12
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 08:14:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from dcave.digsys.bg (dcave.digsys.bg [192.92.129.5])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by smtp-sofia.digsys.bg (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pBD8DpHH086299
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO)
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 10:13:56 +0200 (EET)
	(envelope-from daniel@digsys.bg)
Message-ID: <4EE7093E.4050006@digsys.bg>
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 10:13:50 +0200
From: Daniel Kalchev <daniel@digsys.bg>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64;
	rv:8.0) Gecko/20111110 Thunderbird/8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
References: <4EE1EAFE.3070408@m5p.com> <4EE22421.9060707@gmail.com>
	<4EE6060D.5060201@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de>
	<20111213073615.GA69641@icarus.home.lan>
In-Reply-To: <20111213073615.GA69641@icarus.home.lan>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 08:14:04 -0000



On 13.12.11 09:36, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> I personally would find it interesting if someone with a higher-end 
> system (e.g. 2 physical CPUs, with 6 or 8 cores per CPU) was to do the 
> same test (changing -jX to -j{numofcores} of course). 

Is 4 way 8 core Opteron ok? That is 32 cores, 64GB RAM.

Testing with buildworld in my opinion is not adequate, as it involves 
way too much I/O. Any advice on proper testing methodology?

These systems run ZFS, but could be booted diskless for the tests.

Daniel