Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:39:43 -0800
From:      Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com>
To:        Alexander Best <arundel@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: TTY task group scheduling
Message-ID:  <39F4F32E-A30C-47F3-AD69-F7777A7E30A8@mac.com>
In-Reply-To: <20101118182324.GA36312@freebsd.org>
References:  <AANLkTinHSX1%2Bs3hrHyDeU2Vfp6zekTe04XkHhTc2jtLv@mail.gmail.com> <4CE50849.106@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <4CE52177.3020306@freebsd.org> <20101118182324.GA36312@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Nov 18, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Alexander Best wrote:
> On Thu Nov 18 10, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>> on 18/11/2010 13:04 O. Hartmann said the following:
>>> On 11/18/10 02:30, grarpamp wrote:
>>>> Just documenting regarding interactive performance things.
>>>> This one's from Linux.
>>>> 
>>>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_2637_video&num=1
>>> 
>>> Well,
>>> it would be nice to have those improvements in FreeBSD, but I doubt this will make
>>> it in due time to FreeBSD's kernel.
>> 
>> Well, I think that those improvements apply only to a very specific usage pattern
>> and are greatly over-hyped.
> 
> you think so? judging from the videos the changes are having a huge impact imo.
> 
> cheers.
> alex
> 
> btw: i posted a similar thread on freebsd-backers@, but nobody seemed
> interested in it. subject line is "sched_autogroup_enabled".

I attempted to find reliable benchmarks or even an idea as to what they thought they were measuring, because a sentence like the following:

   Tests done by Mike show the maximum latency dropping by over ten times and the average latency of the desktop by about 60 times.

...isn't mathematically possible, I'm pretty sure.

Frankly, I'm also turned off by the attempt to popup a full page ad in addition to the rest of the advertising content which surrounds what is nominally supposed to be the real content.  That doesn't mean there is anything wrong with the patch or the notion of adjusting the scheduler, but I don't see any value added from these phoronix.com links.

Regards,
-- 
-Chuck




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?39F4F32E-A30C-47F3-AD69-F7777A7E30A8>