Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 22:44:21 +0200 From: Vallo Kallaste <kalts@estpak.ee> To: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SCHED_ULE ok again. feedback please? Message-ID: <20030306204421.GA5095@kevad.internal> In-Reply-To: <20030304011700.C62398-100000@mail.chesapeake.net> References: <20030304011700.C62398-100000@mail.chesapeake.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 01:25:24AM -0500, Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net> wrote: > I'm using SCHED_ULE on my laptop now. My recent round of fixes seems to > have helped out. I'm getting good interactive performance. I'm doing the > following: > > nice -5'd for (;;) {} process. > make -j4 buildworld > > Mozilla, pine, irc, screen, vi, etc. > > All interactive tasks are very responsive. My nice -5'd looping process > is getting 70% of the cpu and my compile is taking the rest. nice +20 may > not behave as well as in sched_4bsd right now. I'm going to work on that. > > This is on a 2ghz laptop though so your mileage may vary. Use reports are > welcome. Much improved, can work while two seti@home processes run at nice 19. Still takes more time to show directory listing (ls -la) compared to scheduler and the listing itself is a bit "jumpy". Scrolls about 20 lines, then waits for a moment, then scrolls forward again and so on. The stopping moments are actually very short, but noticeable. This is while the seti's are running, 2CPU PIII-500. -- Vallo Kallaste To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030306204421.GA5095>