Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 14:47:49 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Patrick Tracanelli <eksffa@freebsdbrasil.com.br> Cc: Valmir Consoni <vconsoni@vipway.com.br> Subject: Re: -RC1 more stable when compared to -STABLE Message-ID: <20041020214749.GA52017@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <4176D9A3.9030500@freebsdbrasil.com.br> References: <4176D9A3.9030500@freebsdbrasil.com.br>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 06:33:23PM -0300, Patrick Tracanelli wrote: > > Recently I was running a number of tests against 5.3-STABLE (btw, > RELENG_5 labeling the system as 5.3-STABLE might be very confusing in a > situation where there's not even a 5.3-RELEASE yet, if one doesnt follow > how -STABLE are treated compared to "security branchs"), in a SMP system > with multiple SATA RAID, and it was not responding well, had a number of > freezes under stress tests; Some of those problems could be minimized > running BSD as the scheduller instead of ULE; > > Now -RC1 shows the same performance 5.2.1 used to, also w/ SCHED_BSD, > but with ULE it stops responding well sometimes. Don't use ULE! It has known problems! Kris [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFBdt0FWry0BWjoQKURArK6AKCmsdQ5haWyK1RrnH4eUnnREuUyMACdH6hB o/QcJir7li4T76AaCTfytYQ= =km9A -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041020214749.GA52017>