From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 19 22:48:52 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66C681065670; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 22:48:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yanegomi@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wy0-f182.google.com (mail-wy0-f182.google.com [74.125.82.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EFDE8FC21; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 22:48:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wyb35 with SMTP id 35so4205885wyb.13 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 14:48:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:sender:received :in-reply-to:references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=OKivmdL38kmUllIet02P14SJJSx6J4tTwf29wTSZyu0=; b=CxOCWEM4tSuYbm8sJrVTwvR49GlQL1vNjymk+PQ1OMRJShd41sUnTM57KnuR2DqGEX nNzq2h/PzPSQIvDWy//va9OHFppkqd0wXeRsRNKlbiaOStDh57+WpfIcwNdsMViFXNmC BJSUa77I4UrBaJ63oz9kZsUFrGENHCOhYgJEI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=iqROAnHc5dMouhtLYDBTThJ5Jpa5eD6/cnxCOvyzSVsUJBxvE3VKLKMumQvFFmPxvJ r/lIdUnzOsXZOaeCYn31C6OjEx8ngu1aJeLA3zML9dl3FGi42uNsiMR9lXdyw7+mQBbh G33tdjUvBkSs7NIiIwK/YJSv2xbbqWXr1NaF0= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.46.200 with SMTP id r50mr1631469web.45.1290206829686; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 14:47:09 -0800 (PST) Sender: yanegomi@gmail.com Received: by 10.216.198.27 with HTTP; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 14:46:51 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <4CE50849.106@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 14:46:51 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: UWBQV1PqdJN4_V7UOuWPfL6gjXY Message-ID: From: Garrett Cooper To: Oliver Pinter Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 23:12:44 +0000 Cc: FreeBSD Stable , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Current , "O. Hartmann" Subject: Re: TTY task group scheduling X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 22:48:52 -0000 On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Oliver Pinter wrote: > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/11/16/392 > > On 11/18/10, O. Hartmann wrote: >> 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. And my one line fix: renice 10 `pidof firefox-bin` Instantly my system is snappier (and in fact my system got really laggy after applying the preempt sysctl that everyone recommended before)... Performance issue with firefox maybe :P? I don't see the point of adding an additional layer to complicate the system (and essentially slow it down) if all you're trying to do is better describe the nice'ing problem, unless this logic is what you want to do strictly for desktop users in PCBSD, etc who may not have the technical wherewithal to accomplish this task. Besides, the Linux kernel has different compile time profiles for different workloads, so maybe it just works better for them because they already have a means for describing that functionality, whereas FreeBSD is more generic. It would be nice to describe this in a document though so people could also decide how to tune the system for themselves and not deal with a patch like what's noted above by the penguin crowd because it will invariably fail under some workloads or conditions (I have yet to see a one-size-fits-all solution in this area). SCHED_ULE improvements though should be looked into if possible, because there are some potential items that could be done to cluster processes together better, maybe. Thanks, -Garrett