Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:06:47 +0100 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CPU affinity with ULE scheduler Message-ID: <gfce2s$hmv$1@ger.gmane.org> In-Reply-To: <42e3d810811102302h3a0e38bcuf1195cf0a89c29a7@mail.gmail.com> References: <42e3d810811100033w172e90dbl209ecbab640cc24f@mail.gmail.com> <200811101733.04547.jhb@freebsd.org> <42e3d810811102032w7850a1c0t386d80ce747f37d3@mail.gmail.com> <42e3d810811102302h3a0e38bcuf1195cf0a89c29a7@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Archimedes Gaviola wrote: > Hi Ivan, > > Archimedes Gaviola wrote: >> To Whom It May Concerned: >> =20 >> Can someone explain or share about ULE scheduler (latest version 2 if >> I'm not mistaken) dealing with CPU affinity? Is there any existing >> benchmarks on this with FreeBSD? Because I am currently using 4BSD > > Yes but not for network loads. See for example benchmarks in > http://people.freebsd.org/~kris/scaling/7.0%20and%20beyond.pdf > > [Archimedes] Ah okay, so based on my understanding with ULE scheduler > in FreeBSD-7.0, it only scale well with userland applications > scheduling such as database and DNS? The problem you are seeing is probably not solvable by a better scheduler. There are other parts of the system that cause performance bottlenecks. I'd recommend you try 7-STABLE, it might help you, but it probably won't.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?gfce2s$hmv$1>