From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 18 12:57:24 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1215416A4CE for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2003 12:57:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from sdf.lonestar.org (ol.freeshell.org [192.94.73.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8185543D31 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2003 12:57:22 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nunotex@freeshell.org) Received: from nunotex.tex.bogus (adslsapo-b3-239-170.telepac.pt [213.13.239.170]) (authenticated (0 bits)) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id hBIKv91L024768; Thu, 18 Dec 2003 20:57:10 GMT Received: by nunotex.tex.bogus (Postfix, from userid 1001) id A8CE742B0; Thu, 18 Dec 2003 20:56:51 +0000 (WET) Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 20:56:51 +0000 From: Nuno Teixeira To: Eric Anderson Message-ID: <20031218205651.GB2503@nunotex.tex.bogus> References: <20031218194326.GA12548@SDF.LONESTAR.ORG> <3FE20898.6050104@centtech.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3FE20898.6050104@centtech.com> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 5.2-RC User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1i cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Any reasons to change BSD scheduler: SCHED_4BSD to SCHED_ULE? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 20:57:24 -0000 Hi, I will try it. I have see some people with opinions similar to yours. Thanks, Nuno Teixeira On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 02:05:44PM -0600, Eric Anderson wrote: > Nuno Teixeira wrote: > > >Hello to all, > > > >I'm using 5.2 RC and I'd like to know if are good reasons to change my > >sheduler to the new one on a UP machine. > > > > > Well, just my $0.02, but last night, while doing some heavy cpu/io > stuff, I noticed that _ULE is in action - I was running mencoder, xmms, > ftp'ing a file locally (100mbit), using a handful of xterm's, and my > usual batch of stuff (netscape/mozilla, gaim, etc) - and I noticed the > machine (even though it was heavily loaded) was VERY responsive, and I > hardly even noticed any load on it at all. Now, under SCHED_4BSD, I > definitely would have noticed.. I know because I went back to 4BSD for > a few days when trying to hunt down a bug, and that's when I realized > there really is a difference.. > > But, ymmv.. > > Eric > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Eric Anderson Systems Administrator Centaur Technology > All generalizations are false, including this one. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > -- /* PGP fingerprint: C6D1 06ED EB54 A99C 6B14 6732 0A5D 810D 727D F6C6 */