Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 14:47:57 +0100 From: "O. Hartmann" <ohartman@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de> To: Current FreeBSD <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default Message-ID: <4EE6060D.5060201@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de> In-Reply-To: <4EE22421.9060707@gmail.com> References: <4EE1EAFE.3070408@m5p.com> <4EE22421.9060707@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig3C34C0DC945A3DBF809616AD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Not fully right, boinc defaults to run on idprio 31 so this isn't an > issue. And yes, there are cases where SCHED_ULE shows much better > performance then SCHED_4BSD. [...] Do we have any proof at hand for such cases where SCHED_ULE performs much better than SCHED_4BSD? Whenever the subject comes up, it is mentioned, that SCHED_ULE has better performance on boxes with a ncpu > 2. But in the end I see here contradictionary statements. People complain about poor performance (especially in scientific environments), and other give contra not being the case. Within our department, we developed a highly scalable code for planetary science purposes on imagery. It utilizes present GPUs via OpenCL if present. Otherwise it grabs as many cores as it can. By the end of this year I'll get a new desktop box based on Intels new Sandy Bridge-E architecture with plenty of memory. If the colleague who developed the code is willing performing some benchmarks on the same hardware platform, we'll benchmark bot FreeBSD 9.0/10.0 and the most recent Suse. For FreeBSD I intent also to look for performance with both different schedulers available. O. --------------enig3C34C0DC945A3DBF809616AD Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iF4EAREIAAYFAk7mBhMACgkQU6Ni+wtCKv9mzQD9EQm3oYTJl1UY826v0xiOzMeF nrbUBR3bAjsxSp3A2hYA/0TL0ltenxGrjE6h8DEiQg6ozCymbh7vkFCTBnHkZlaP =8zGJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig3C34C0DC945A3DBF809616AD--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4EE6060D.5060201>