From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Dec 12 16:43:52 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 2F158106564A;
	Mon, 12 Dec 2011 16:43:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fidaj@ukr.net)
Received: from fsm1.ukr.net (fsm1.ukr.net [195.214.192.120])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1BC88FC0A;
	Mon, 12 Dec 2011 16:43:51 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ukr.net;
	s=fsm; 
	h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Mime-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date;
	bh=jD/DGWevIEiPAWIQLQuAD22uufZYP5CNuRFCmUv51UA=; 
	b=Dl0Gj5PbcN+1zz7mVWHE8/hPnfQxmsQdacvdqYFZvJtXvtn6Vuo9nFSEGw5UGmTAbc3eMexcRz+2Fi96kma36t1L9updJ005PSmNRxyWYNRFpgXcQd2MzgGq0oSNK7BFhPkdH7Bk1m/Yibe7yklOeunEW8URctf1hqGoINM0gRY=;
Received: from [178.137.138.140] (helo=nonamehost.)
	by fsm1.ukr.net with esmtpsa ID 1Ra8k5-0000sP-U4
	; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 18:28:41 +0200
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 18:28:41 +0200
From: Ivan Klymenko <fidaj@ukr.net>
To: Bruce Cran <bruce@cran.org.uk>
Message-ID: <20111212182841.31f669ca@nonamehost.>
In-Reply-To: <4EE6295B.3020308@cran.org.uk>
References: <4EE1EAFE.3070408@m5p.com> <4EE22421.9060707@gmail.com>
	<4EE6060D.5060201@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de>
	<20111212155159.GB73597@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
	<4EE6295B.3020308@cran.org.uk>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.10 (GTK+ 2.24.6; amd64-portbld-freebsd10.0)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "O. Hartmann" <ohartman@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de>,
	Current FreeBSD <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>,
	freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org,
	Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
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: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 16:43:52 -0000

=D0=92 Mon, 12 Dec 2011 16:18:35 +0000
Bruce Cran <bruce@cran.org.uk> =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82:

> On 12/12/2011 15:51, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > This comes up every 9 months or so, and must be approaching FAQ=20
> > status. In a HPC environment, I recommend 4BSD. Depending on the=20
> > workload, ULE can cause a severe increase in turn around time when=20
> > doing already long computations. If you have an MPI application,=20
> > simply launching greater than ncpu+1 jobs can show the problem. PS:=20
> > search the list archives for "kargl and ULE".=20
>=20
> This isn't something that can be fixed by tuning ULE? For example for=20
> desktop applications kern.sched.preempt_thresh should be set to 224
> from its default. I'm wondering if the installer should ask people
> what the typical use will be, and tune the scheduler appropriately.
>=20

This is by and large does not help in certain situations ...