From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 26 06:09:14 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D549B37B401 for ; Sat, 26 Apr 2003 06:09:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from digitalme.com (pop.digitalme.com [193.97.97.75]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7973B43F85 for ; Sat, 26 Apr 2003 06:09:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dkt@digitalme.com) Received: from dkt [61.18.141.210] by digitalme.com with NIMS ModWeb Module; Sat, 26 Apr 2003 21:09:13 +0800 From: Dung Patrick To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 21:09:13 +0800 X-Mailer: NIMS ModWeb Module X-Sender: dkt MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <1051362553.c8e66a40dkt@digitalme.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="BIG5" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: my experience with the SCHED_ULE X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 13:09:15 -0000 Hi, My PC is an PIII SMP. I have been using the SCHED_4BSD (with ADAPTIVE_MUTEX= ) with 5-Current for some time. Now I have tried the SCHED_ULE (with ADAP= TIVE_MUTEX). I have tried some real world applications like Mozilla, xmms, and run insid= e KDE. The performance is about the same with SCHED_4BSD. But I could not= ice a little bit slow down/delay when I switch to another process. For ex= ample: use the mouse to press the menu bar of konsole and drag it. I coul= d see a small delay before the window moves. Finally, I would appreicate all the developers for their time and effort on= freebsd. Regards, Patrick