Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 20:16:44 +0000 From: Bruce Cran <bruce@cran.org.uk> To: Lucius Windschuh <lwindschuh@googlemail.com> Cc: Alexander Best <arundel@freebsd.org>, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: TTY task group scheduling Message-ID: <20101118201644.00004c3c@unknown> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimq=5KJb5AGA6H0yA7AWrp%2BHZMRhfH6pnh=_NqA@mail.gmail.com> References: <AANLkTinHSX1%2Bs3hrHyDeU2Vfp6zekTe04XkHhTc2jtLv@mail.gmail.com> <4CE50849.106@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <4CE52177.3020306@freebsd.org> <AANLkTimq=5KJb5AGA6H0yA7AWrp%2BHZMRhfH6pnh=_NqA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:55:05 +0100 Lucius Windschuh <lwindschuh@googlemail.com> wrote: > Because currently, my machine is barely usable if a compile job with > parallelism is running. Movies stutter, Firefox hangs. And even nice > -n 20 doesn't do the job in every case, as +20 seems not to be the > idle priority anymore?!? If you're using UFS, I've found it to be quite a bottleneck when doing parallel IO: I even ran a "svn up" in one terminal and tried to login on another a couple of days ago only to find the motd took over 5 seconds to appear! That may be excessive since I was running a kernel with WITNESS and INVARIANTS, but I've found ZFS to be far better if you want good interactivity when reading/writing to disks. -- Bruce Cran
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20101118201644.00004c3c>