Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 10 Dec 2003 15:46:19 +0200
From:      Vallo Kallaste <kalts@estpak.ee>
To:        Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net>
Cc:        current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: ULE and current.
Message-ID:  <20031210134619.GA2552@kevad.internal>
In-Reply-To: <20031207082612.D4201-100000@mail.chesapeake.net>
References:  <20031207082612.D4201-100000@mail.chesapeake.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 08:30:13AM -0500, Jeff Roberson
<jroberson@chesapeake.net> wrote:

> The plan is to leave ULE as the default until we get to 5.3 at which point
> we will decide whether or not it is production quality.  The most
> untest workload that I know of is on massive multiuser systems with lots
> of interactive tasks.  If anyone has such a system, I would love to hear
> of feedback while running ULE.  For anyone else, if your workload is
> either improved or hindered, I'd appreciate a mail with the a description
> of your workload, your hardware, behavior with ULE, and behavior with
> 4BSD.

I have one noticeable annoyance with ULE while setiathome is
running. It takes sometimes a second or two more to open mailbox
(maildir format) with several hundreds of messages. If setiathome is
stopped it will not happen, the mailbox will be opened instantly.
The system is dual PIII-500, sources and kernel from Nov 27, two
setiathome processes running at nice 20.
-- 
Vallo Kallaste



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031210134619.GA2552>