From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Dec  8 00:44:12 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 92C0316A4CE
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Mon,  8 Dec 2003 00:44:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from web14102.mail.yahoo.com (web14102.mail.yahoo.com
	[216.136.172.132])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3854543F85
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Mon,  8 Dec 2003 00:44:11 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from cguttesen@yahoo.dk)
Message-ID: <20031208084411.26960.qmail@web14102.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [194.248.174.58] by web14102.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP;
	Mon, 08 Dec 2003 09:44:11 CET
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 09:44:11 +0100 (CET)
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Claus=20Guttesen?= <cguttesen@yahoo.dk>
To: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net>, current@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <20031207082612.D4201-100000@mail.chesapeake.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: ULE and current.
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
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: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 08:44:12 -0000

Hi.

> more feedback from current users.  The only big
> change I have in the
> pipeline for ULE is improved HTT support.  This has
> all been coded and

> multiuser systems with lots
> of interactive tasks.  If anyone has such a system,
> I would love to hear
> of feedback while running ULE.  For anyone else, if
> your workload is

I'm running ULE on 1 out of 6 web-servers. This is
running current as of Nov. 19'th. I havent't noticed
any difference in behaviour compared to the other five
servers. It varies from 100 % idle to 0 %, runs quite
smothly. NFS behaves nice.

The other servers are all using the old BSD-scheduler
and are mainly running 5.1 frozen branch.

All are dual Xeons at either 2.4 or 3 Ghz.

My workstation with dual pentium III @ 1 ghz goes ULE
as well. Except while unpacking big files, the
scheduler is behaving alot better compared to
two-three months ago.

regards
Claus


Yahoo! Mail (http://dk.mail.yahoo.com) - Gratis: 6 MB lagerplads, spamfilter og virusscan