From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 7 22:01:04 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org 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 C25F816A401 for ; Sun, 7 May 2006 22:01:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from duane@greenmeadow.ca) Received: from smtpout.eastlink.ca (smtpout.eastlink.ca [24.222.0.30]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C8EF43D55 for ; Sun, 7 May 2006 22:01:03 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from duane@greenmeadow.ca) Received: from ip03.eastlink.ca ([24.222.10.15]) by mta01.eastlink.ca (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-4.03 (built Sep 22 2005)) with ESMTP id <0IYX00J7414MQ250@mta01.eastlink.ca> for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Sun, 07 May 2006 19:00:22 -0300 (ADT) Received: from blk-224-199-230.eastlink.ca (HELO [192.168.0.103]) ([24.224.199.230]) by ip03.eastlink.ca with ESMTP; Sun, 07 May 2006 19:01:02 -0300 Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 19:00:14 -0300 From: Duane Whitty In-reply-to: <200605071041.28391.jhorne@dfwlp.com> To: Jonathan Horne Message-id: <445E6DEE.1060408@greenmeadow.ca> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-BrightmailFiltered: true X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAA+k= References: <445DC132.7060405@greenmeadow.ca> <200605071041.28391.jhorne@dfwlp.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060503) Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ULE Scheduler and overall performance on 6.x - Wow X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 22:01:04 -0000 Jonathan Horne wrote: > i remember when i first started using freebsd about 2 months ago, the first > kernel i built, i did the ULE (at some articles recommendataion). but, ive > not done it since. i guess i have been noticing a bit of lag on my system > (amd 1800mhz 512rdram, u160 scsi raid0), but nothing unacceptable. > > however, since i didnt have a problem with my first kernel that i did, and > your positive response, i decided to go ahead and change out the specified > scheduler in my kernconf, and let 'er rip. > > is your system a desktop? were your prevously running the same desktop > configuration on the same box, with the 4BSD? is the ULE scheduler suited > for a server setup as well (my server is also SMP), or is this something that > should be kept to a desktop? > > thanks, > jonathan horne > > My system is a "desktop" and yes I was previously using the 4BSD scheduler. As for whether it is suited for a server environment I would say that depends. >From what I understand it is an experimental scheduler meant to bring better performance to SMP machines but that UP machines may also show some improvement. If I was using this box as a server for mission critical applications there are a whole bunch of things I am doing now that I would not be doing. Before I would use any relatively new configuration on a production server I would have to do some reliability testing and benchmarking on a test machine that I had configured to test a particular harware/application mix. I would also be reading what other people had to say and I would first choose to use something that was known to generally work and for which issues were generally know and mostly understood. Also, go where the support is. :) This is basically a test box and a learning platform. There are way too many applications loaded on this machine and they are far too varied in nature for me to single out one aspect of my configuration and say whether or not it is suitable in a server configuration. In addition I wouldn't be able to say whether ULE is suitable for a server after testing it on hardware that is definitely not suitable as a server, in my opinion. I am willing to say that for desktop use the ULE scheduler --seems-- to work great. But do keep in mind Mr. Kennaway's comments per this thread. Of course the 4BSD scheduler works great so I wouldn't switch unless I had a reason to. --Duane > On Sunday 07 May 2006 04:43, Duane Whitty wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I decided to give the ULE scheduler a try a while ago (April 28). >> when I last built 6-STABLE >> >> Anyhow it seems great. I'm running a 2.4GHz Celeron with >> 512MB RAM and two 40GB, PATA disks. Right now I'm running >> both a GNOME and a KDE session, I've got Thunderbird and >> Evolution open, Firefox is running and running well, and I'm >> updating the my local copy of the FreeBSD repository. Oh yeah, >> I'm also running a DNS server, a Sendmail server, and SAMBA >> I can't believe how responsive everything is on this low-end machine >> I'm running. Wow! (And this with debugging turned on but no WITNESS >> or INVARIANTS turned on) >> >> Well time to rebuild the sources :) >> >> dwpc@ /home/duane>uname -a >> FreeBSD dwpc.dwlabs.ca 6.1-RC FreeBSD 6.1-RC #0: Fri Apr 28 18:41:15 ADT >> 2006 duane@dwpc.dwlabs.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/DWPC-KERNEL i386 >> >> Best Regards, >> >> Duane Whitty >> > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > >