From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Sep 29 17:04:52 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67CB216A417 for ; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 17:04:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from oliver@akephalos.de) Received: from mailout03.sul.t-online.com (mailout03.sul.t-online.de [194.25.134.81]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 232C113C45A for ; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 17:04:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from oliver@akephalos.de) Received: from fwd32.aul.t-online.de by mailout03.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 1IbfkI-0005sH-01; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 19:04:50 +0200 Received: from localhost (JJXHUOZDZtA3ayp3nUSEHKEQzsDHb6XQqPEYBD8HNObrbs7m7ZPzqir483eyvrwO72CAw3Q3mg@[84.165.120.121]) by fwd32.t-online.de with esmtp id 1Ibfk6-29VFA00; Sat, 29 Sep 2007 19:04:38 +0200 Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 19:04:38 +0200 From: Oliver Herold To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20070929170438.GA1919@olymp.home> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <80f4f2b20709240723m121aad88ofaf728f384dd6c20@mail.gmail.com> <20070924184415.7bffd7d2@gumby.homeunix.com.> <46FE790A.1000101@FreeBSD.org> <20070929163116.GA1748@olymp.home> <46FE8120.4040608@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46FE8120.4040608@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) X-ID: JJXHUOZDZtA3ayp3nUSEHKEQzsDHb6XQqPEYBD8HNObrbs7m7ZPzqir483eyvrwO72CAw3Q3mg X-TOI-MSGID: c1ab2b4e-f870-4103-bd1d-3c23a4a28ba3 Subject: Re: Questions on the scheduler X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 17:04:52 -0000 Thanks :-) Cheers, Oliver On Sat, Sep 29, 2007 at 06:45:20PM +0200, Kris Kennaway wrote: > Oliver Herold wrote: >> Are there any numbers or technical papers? Just out of curiosity. > > I ran a mysql benchmark against Dragonfly-current and FreeBSD 7 on an > 8-core machine (one of the workloads that FreeBSD now performs very well > at) and found 0 scaling on dragonfly. Their developers confirmed that the > kernel is still entirely giant locked (as in FreeBSD 4) so no SMP > performance benefits are possible. > > The email thread is here: > > http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/mailarchive/users/2007-05/msg00134.html > > although the linked graph is offline. The FreeBSD curve was essentially > this one (FreeBSD has improved further since then): > > http://people.freebsd.org/~kris/scaling/scaling.png > > with dragonfly a flat line at ~500 tps independent of load. > > Kris > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" -- Per buck you get more computing action with the small computer. -- R. W. Hamming