From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Nov 16 21:08:47 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 995CB16A4CE for ; Sun, 16 Nov 2003 21:08:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (troutmask.apl.washington.edu [128.208.78.105]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC4D443FAF for ; Sun, 16 Nov 2003 21:08:46 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) hAH58k8I097124; Sun, 16 Nov 2003 21:08:46 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: (from sgk@localhost)hAH58kv7097123; Sun, 16 Nov 2003 21:08:46 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 21:08:46 -0800 From: Steve Kargl To: Harald Schmalzbauer Message-ID: <20031117050846.GB96991@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <200311170439.13103@harrymail> <20031117042542.GA96576@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <200311170541.09527@harrymail> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200311170541.09527@harrymail> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: init and USB oddities-ULE-ATA 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: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 05:08:47 -0000 On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 05:41:04AM +0100, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote: Content-Description: signed data > On Monday 17 November 2003 05:25, Steve Kargl wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 04:39:08AM +0100, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote: > > Content-Description: signed data > > > > > > > Next I'd like to report is what I already mentioned in "ULE and very bad > > > responsiveness" I followed Jeff Roberson hint and ran setiathome with > > > nice 20. But this didn't really change anything. > > > > ULE has been rock solid for me since Jeff's last > > major update. Of course, I run neither setiathome > > nor KDE. > > > Give setiathome a try! You'll be astonished. No thanks. It's a waste of CPU cycle. > And I'm sure the difference I _feel_ isn't dependend on kde. If you > don't like kde replace it with our favourite wm/desktop. I prefer fvwm2. ULE works fairly well. > But you won't be able to play two mid to high-quality > mpegs at the same time on a 1GHz machine where 4BSD scheduler does very well! I can assure you that the numerical simulations I run, along with the "make worlds", and compilations of gcc's tree-ssa branch stress the system. I re-install over 100 ports today and the load average was rarely below 5. I was use linux-opera and knews and sylpheed and several other program and noticed nor degradation in responsiveness. Does seti cause a problem if you are not running X (or KDE). > I haven't claimed ULE to be unstable though. I just wanted to highlight some > issues which will be a big problem if 5.2-releas will have ULE as default! If ULE is destined to be the default scheduler in 5-stable, then we need to have more people test it. -- Steve