Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 13:00:51 +0400 From: Andrey Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Ivan Klymenko <fidaj@ukr.net> Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG, "O. Hartmann" <ohartman@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de>, Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.ORG>, Current FreeBSD <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>, freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default Message-ID: <20111213090051.GA3339@vniz.net> In-Reply-To: <20111213104048.40f3e3de@nonamehost.> References: <4EE1EAFE.3070408@m5p.com> <4EE22421.9060707@gmail.com> <4EE6060D.5060201@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de> <4EE69C5A.3090005@FreeBSD.org> <20111213104048.40f3e3de@nonamehost.>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 10:40:48AM +0200, Ivan Klymenko wrote: > > 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 > > > > If the algorithm ULE does not contain problems - it means the problem > has Core2Duo, or in a piece of code that uses the ULE scheduler. I observe ULE interactivity slowness even on single core machine (Pentium 4) in very visible places, like 'ps ax' output stucks in the middle by ~1 second. When I switch back to SHED_4BSD, all slowness is gone. -- http://ache.vniz.net/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20111213090051.GA3339>