Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 19:00:43 +0100 From: "O. Hartmann" <ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de> To: Daniel Kalchev <daniel@digsys.bg> Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Stable Mailing List <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, Current FreeBSD <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, "Samuel J. Greear" <sjg@evilcode.net>, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Jeremy Chadwick <freebsd@jdc.parodius.com> Subject: Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server Message-ID: <4EEA35CB.7030203@zedat.fu-berlin.de> In-Reply-To: <0C72D682-CF5E-42D6-91F3-FEF1AB02F5D6@digsys.bg> References: <CAJ-FndDniGH8QoT=kUxOQ%2BzdVhWF0Z0NKLU0PGS-Gt=BK6noWw@mail.gmail.com> <4EE2AE64.9060802@m5p.com> <4EE88343.2050302@m5p.com> <CAFHbX1%2B5PttyZuNnYot8emTn_AWkABdJCvnpo5rcRxVXj0ypJA@mail.gmail.com> <4EE933C6.4020209@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <CAPjTQNEJDE17TLH-mDrG_-_Qa9R5N3mSeXSYYWtqz_DFidzYQw@mail.gmail.com> <20111215024249.GA13557@icarus.home.lan> <4EE9A2A0.80607@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <CAJ-VmomWnAvsVPcK0mfFECvFw_FKcja1m3NE9ue=TOkF%2Bx14Xg@mail.gmail.com> <CANY-Wm8jbtr3tiwdGQMDx8SVZKEBspGwTV7Q0wziYWsV%2Bf3BSQ@mail.gmail.com> <20111215134853.GA24753@icarus.home.lan> <0C72D682-CF5E-42D6-91F3-FEF1AB02F5D6@digsys.bg>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] Am 12/15/11 14:58, schrieb Daniel Kalchev: > > On Dec 15, 2011, at 3:48 PM, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > > […] >> That said: thrown out, data ignored, done. >> >> Now what? Where are we? We're right back where we were a day or two >> ago; meaning no closer to solving the dilemma reported by users and >> SCHED_ULE. Heck, we're not even sure if there is an issue, other than >> some folks confirming that SCHED_4BSD performs better for them (that's >> what started this whole thread), and there are at least a couple which >> have stated this. > > But, are any of these benchmarks really engaging the 4BSD/ULE scheduler differences? Most such benchmarks are run on a system with no other load whatsoever and in no way represent real world experience. > > What is more, I believe in such benchmarks "the system feels sluggish" is not measured at all. Even if it is measured, if in such case the benchmark finishes "better" - that is, faster, or say, makes the system freeze for the user for the duration of the test -- it will be considered "win", because the benchmark suite ran faster on that particular system -- whereas a system which ran the benchmark fast, provided good interactive response etc would be considered "loser". I guess you have some proofs on that "feeling"? > > I think it is not good idea to hijack this thread, but instead focusing on the other SCHED_ULE bashing thread to define an reasonable benchmark or a set of benchmarks rather -- so that many would run it and provide feedback. > > > Daniel_______________________________________________ [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJO6jXLAAoJEOgBcD7A/5N8eHMH+gIP8qH2klzQvMwrpp40QhU1 E1Bd4Q13P5RAc69oJJWdBzz4jV9Oz9aJZzpc4uHnFI9FyxBVY9LL3QVuX3cErK7u NmxS6Hl3AkrfAZ2I0O/XGq6LF6Kmcw83LCKWubexRAaIIr4YjZd/AiTd5TlU1nyy Nml9b8yyJlt9aggS22TO6UTnqRxcvqFQhP8hAZnPjYsoN6sDd3TRynAJqNc7LWeW P8jBxo2+gqEnNDl4LYrr+RDM6Gsbr3k2+YYK98miX/DUHBLEBx0liVCpy+lPNWhl XBqGGGPjveUqBEVvUiOixU7aO8rxQDnL3PBSdreL7xeOTvP9bRdZ1lnaxpEq+4M= =YwYJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4EEA35CB.7030203>