Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 12:32:00 -0700 From: "Kip Macy" <kip.macy@gmail.com> To: "Artem Kuchin" <matrix@itlegion.ru> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Scheduler selection for web hosting Message-ID: <b1fa29170710041232s5effd277rbf0a8705bf94927b@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <009a01c806bc$5c7021d0$0c00a8c0@Artem> References: <009a01c806bc$5c7021d0$0c00a8c0@Artem>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10/4/07, Artem Kuchin <matrix@itlegion.ru> wrote: > Hello! > > I have read that in 7-Current there are two schedulers. > 4BSD - which, AFAIK, is a renamed new SMP scheduler, but i'm not sure > ULE > > 7-current amd64 is actually seems to be VERY stable on hardware and > software we use, so, we want to move it to production servers and > want to get max perfomance from it for web hosting. > > As, as i know, scheduler is a very important thing when i comes to > perfomance in havy loaded really multitasking system. We are having > about 900 processes in about 20 jails. > > So, what is the difference between the two? Which seems to be better > for hosting? Is ULE bugfree and stable enogh for this? > ULE has been very heavily tested. I find in most of my networking benchmarks on 4-way / 8-way machines it reduces cpu utilization by 1/3rd for a given level of throughput. Your mileage will of course vary. -Kip
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?b1fa29170710041232s5effd277rbf0a8705bf94927b>