From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Oct  2 01:35:04 2007
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7562A16A419;
	Tue,  2 Oct 2007 01:35:04 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from jroberson@chesapeake.net)
Received: from webaccess-cl.virtdom.com (webaccess-cl.virtdom.com
	[216.240.101.25])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CE3113C455;
	Tue,  2 Oct 2007 01:35:04 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from jroberson@chesapeake.net)
Received: from [192.168.1.103] (c-67-160-44-208.hsd1.wa.comcast.net
	[67.160.44.208]) (authenticated bits=0)
	by webaccess-cl.virtdom.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
	l921YrJd013143
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-DSS-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Mon, 1 Oct 2007 21:34:54 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from jroberson@chesapeake.net)
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 18:37:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net>
X-X-Sender: jroberson@10.0.0.1
To: Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <20071001205923.U2657@besplex.bde.org>
Message-ID: <20071001183337.J583@10.0.0.1>
References: <20070930040318.094E345018@ptavv.es.net>
	<20070930153430.U583@10.0.0.1>
	<20071001172620.X1839@besplex.bde.org> <20071001020835.B583@10.0.0.1>
	<20071001205923.U2657@besplex.bde.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-src@freebsd.org,
	Jeff Roberson <jeff@freebsd.org>, Garance A Drosehn <gad@freebsd.org>,
	Ben Kaduk <minimarmot@gmail.com>, cvs-all@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern sched_ule.c 
X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree <cvs-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2007 01:35:04 -0000

On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Bruce Evans wrote:

> On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Jeff Roberson wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Bruce Evans wrote:
>> 
>>> On Sun, 30 Sep 2007, Jeff Roberson wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> YMMV, but ULE seems to generally work better then 4BSD for interactive
>>>>> uniprocessor systems. The preferred scheduler for uniprocessor servers
>>>>> is less clear, but many test have shown ULE does better for those
>>>>> systems in the majority of cases.
>>>> 
>>>> I feel it's safe to say desktop behavior on UP is definitely superior.
>>> 
>>> This is unsafe to say.
>> 
>> Given that the overwhelming amount of feedback by qualified poeple, I think 
>> it's fair to say that ULE gives a more responsive system under load.
>
> This is not my experience.  Maybe I don't run enough interactive bloatware
> to have a large enough interactive load for the scheduler to make a
> difference.

Yes it's unfortunate but our users want to run multimedia applications, 
play games, and use graphical web browsers.  If we could just convince 
them to only use xterms, play 'fortune', and use lynx we could solve a lot 
of these issues with less effort.

Jeff

>
> Bruce
>