From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 21 05:49:00 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FA6716A4CE for ; Fri, 21 Jan 2005 05:49:00 +0000 (GMT) Received: from web53908.mail.yahoo.com (web53908.mail.yahoo.com [206.190.36.218]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EFCCB43D2F for ; Fri, 21 Jan 2005 05:48:59 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from stheg_olloydson@yahoo.com) Received: (qmail 40904 invoked by uid 60001); 21 Jan 2005 05:48:59 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=x07GMc5Kq+h4mPC+iDweOxxwf/w6ZiEYlAAPy3Dc+55bFHDIgyPcujqw7zXa9CDAsOterq2Clfr+yJdbukUrf9BpDMpNBLjr1tHBgvvD07qbXF+H+LykuHmi6Fu2Oy6mNqqdC8yO2u8OpbgkTb1JyBOZTi8AACdmTijyMPix+tc= ; Message-ID: <20050121054859.40902.qmail@web53908.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [68.18.53.121] by web53908.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 20 Jan 2005 21:48:59 PST Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 21:48:59 -0800 (PST) From: stheg olloydson To: gbell72@rogers.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Thread Scheduling X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 05:49:00 -0000 it was said: >My question is, will I notice any performance improvement by using the >new scheduler opposed to the 4.4BSD scheduler on an SMP system and can >the new scheduler be utilized on a single processor system? The >intended use of the SMP system is for MySQL databases only. Hello, I asked about the new scheduler on the performance list. Below is (posted on list) reply: >FWIW, one of the reasons that there hasn't been as much >interest in SCHED_ULE lately is likely that several of the >features previously only present in SCHED_ULE are now also >present in SCHED_4BSD -- for example, making more effective >uses of IPIs in reducing latency during inter-process >communication across processors. While SCHED_ULE does contain >a number of interesting things not present in SCHED_4BSD, the >4BSD scheduler has hardly gone un-improved in that time. >However, Jeff Robserson does seem to have picked up recently >on both VFS SMP locking and ULE. The scheduler tracing and >visualization tools he committed a couple of weeks ago are >really quite neat tools. > >Robert N M Watson So we'll just have to wait until ULE is fully baked to see which scheduler is best for a given application. For a more definitive answer, you may want to ask directly on the performance list. HTH, stheg __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail