From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Dec 13 00:29:15 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::35])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B754E1065672;
	Tue, 13 Dec 2011 00:29:15 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from 172-17-198-245.globalsuite.net (hub.freebsd.org
	[IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::36])
	by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F52614FAE3;
	Tue, 13 Dec 2011 00:29:15 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <4EE69C5A.3090005@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 16:29:14 -0800
From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64;
	rv:8.0) Gecko/20111110 Thunderbird/8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "O. Hartmann" <ohartman@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de>
References: <4EE1EAFE.3070408@m5p.com> <4EE22421.9060707@gmail.com>
	<4EE6060D.5060201@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de>
In-Reply-To: <4EE6060D.5060201@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de>
X-Enigmail-Version: undefined
OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org,
	Current FreeBSD <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 00:29:15 -0000

On 12/12/2011 05:47, O. Hartmann wrote:
> Do we have any proof at hand for such cases where SCHED_ULE performs
> much better than SCHED_4BSD?

I complained about poor interactive performance of ULE in a desktop
environment for years. I had numerous people try to help, including
Jeff, with various tunables, dtrace'ing, etc. The cause of the problem
was never found.

I switched to 4BSD, problem gone.

This is on 2 separate systems with core 2 duos.


hth,

Doug

-- 

		[^L]

	Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
	Yours for the right price.  :)  http://SupersetSolutions.com/