Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 10:40:06 +0100 (BST) From: "Matt" <matt@xtaz.co.uk> To: current@freebsd.org Subject: 4BSD vs ULE scheduler question Message-ID: <30186.193.35.129.161.1054287606.squirrel@webmail.xtaz.co.uk>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Just a quick question. I have been running -CURRENT since just before 5.0 was released and have seen the introduction of the ULE scheduler and the associated mails on this list about it. I know it used to be classed as very experimental and you should use 4BSD if you want stability etc. I was wondering if that is still the case these days? The other question which I am not too sure about is what are the advantages of ULE over 4BSD or vice versa? I know a lot of people will now probably say "stick with 4BSD if you don't know" or something and I will if ULE is still not recommended for general use. But I am just curious to learn a bit more about it. Regards, Matt. -- email: matt@xtaz.co.uk - web: http://xtaz.co.uk/ Hardware, n.: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?30186.193.35.129.161.1054287606.squirrel>