Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2011 18:38:23 +0200 From: "Hartmann, O." <ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de> To: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Cc: FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, arrowdodger <6yearold@gmail.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds Message-ID: <4E148F7F.5020209@zedat.fu-berlin.de> In-Reply-To: <20110706162811.GA68436@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <4E1421D9.7080808@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <CALH631=F4bSgNDE4w0qcXGMgGxZRRwCP9n-H4M0c%2B1UEaqWr7Q@mail.gmail.com> <4E147F54.40908@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <20110706162811.GA68436@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On 07/06/11 18:28, Steve Kargl wrote: > On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: >> I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing >> better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of suggestions switching >> back to the old SCHED_4BSD scheduler. >> > If you are using MPI in numerical codes, then you want > to use SCHED_4BSD. I've posted numerous times about ULE > and its very poor performance when using MPI. > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2008-October/026375.html > Worth a try, but most of my code I use is OpenMP, not MPI. The post is of 2008, that's three years ago and 9.0 is on the brink to become released ...home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4E148F7F.5020209>