Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 00:20:17 -0800 From: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org> To: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com> Cc: Storms of Perfection <gary@outloud.org>, thierry@herbelot.com, replicator@ngs.ru, hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Clock Granularity (kernel option HZ) Message-ID: <20020201002017.B48439@iguana.icir.org> In-Reply-To: <20020131172729.X38382-100000@patrocles.silby.com> References: <3197.208.141.46.249.1012516570.squirrel@test.outloud.org> <20020131172729.X38382-100000@patrocles.silby.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jan 31, 2002 at 05:33:28PM +0000, Mike Silbersack wrote: > > On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Storms of Perfection wrote: > > > I'm going to benchmark different network senarious with different options > > to see what I can get, and what works best. If someone wants to help me > > out, I could maybe write up a article about it? > > I don't think you'll end up seeing the performance improvements you're > looking for. The case where HZ=1000 is really useful is when using > dummynet; the more accurate scheduling is necessary for it to handle high > data rate pipes properly. HZ also has an impact on select() behaviour when timeouts are used (and device drivers using timeouts as well). A lot of software uses select() with a very short timeout which is usually rounded up to the next tick. If the author of the software is unaware of what goes on (likely) there might be negative effects on performance because such programs stay idle longer than they should. cheers luigi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020201002017.B48439>