Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 16:02:03 +0300 (EEST) From: Dmitry Pryanishnikov <dmitry@atlantis.dp.ua> To: Dimitry Andric <dimitry@andric.com> Cc: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>, stable@freebsd.org, Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: 4.11 snapshots? Message-ID: <20060517155437.T89154@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua> In-Reply-To: <446B0AF3.1070302@andric.com> References: <200605160135.TAA04838@lariat.net> <57d710000605151942p2461338au561269fc5937aee7@mail.gmail.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060515225038.08d72690@lariat.org> <446981CD.5000309@gmail.com> <4469C668.2060807@rerowe.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060516104907.08788ad8@lariat.org> <446A0608.10608@freebsd.org> <20060517130629.T64952@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua> <446B0AF3.1070302@andric.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello! On Wed, 17 May 2006, Dimitry Andric wrote: >> (INVARIANTS removed) RELENG_6 (and 5) _still_ uses >= 50% of CPU time >> for (Intr+Sys), while RELENG_4 doesn't use more than 28% for them. > > Just as a test for RELENG_6, could you try setting kern.hz="100" in your > loader.conf, and repeating your tests? I'm just guessing, but maybe the > higher interrupt rate is a bit too much for an old Celeron... :) This (setting kern.hz="100" in loader.conf) was actually the first thing that I've done in order to get fair comparison. My numbers are got with hz = 100 for every RELENG_x (x=4,5,6). > Cheers, > Dimitry Sincerely, Dmitry -- Atlantis ISP, System Administrator e-mail: dmitry@atlantis.dp.ua nic-hdl: LYNX-RIPE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060517155437.T89154>