From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Aug 16 10:44: 7 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FF4F37B400 for ; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 10:44:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from probity.mcc.ac.uk (probity.mcc.ac.uk [130.88.200.94]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4911743E75 for ; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 10:44:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jcm@freebsd-uk.eu.org) Received: from dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org ([130.88.200.97]) by probity.mcc.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.05 #7) id 17fkdX-00058P-00; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 18:11:48 +0100 Received: from dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org (8.12.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g7GHBh3H060843; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 18:11:43 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from jcm@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org) Received: (from jcm@localhost) by dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id g7GHBcBF060842; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 18:11:38 +0100 (BST) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 18:11:38 +0100 From: Jonathon McKitrick To: Larry Rosenman Cc: Terry Lambert , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: When to consider the new scehduler? Message-ID: <20020816171138.GA60820@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> References: <20020816104037.GA58453@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <3D5CDF48.9C9B30ED@mindspring.com> <20020816115957.GA58797@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <3D5CEE39.51E55574@mindspring.com> <20020816123521.GB58797@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <1029501575.404.10.camel@lerlaptop.lerctr.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1029501575.404.10.camel@lerlaptop.lerctr.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Scanner: exiscan *17fkdX-00058P-00*QQDlbsYQm2o* (Manchester Computing, University of Manchester) Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 07:39:35AM -0500, Larry Rosenman wrote: | On Fri, 2002-08-16 at 07:35, Jonathon McKitrick wrote: | > | > Why don't they just add an extra CPU to handle the GUI?? ;-) | > | | > | They did. 4.0.2 was the ES/MP (Enhanced Security/Multi Processing) | > | > I thought only NT-SMP did that. I *thought* I was being funny. :-) | SVR4.2 is a totally threaded kernel. SVR5 (UnixWare 7/OpenUNIX 8) takes | it even further. I run an OpenUnix 8+ box in addition to FreeBSD. if | any FreeBSD developers want a shell account to look around, I can | arrange it. | | [snip] I was just making a joke about how (IIRC) Win2K's use of a second CPU in the default setting is just to offload all of the GUI handling to it, so the UI stays snappy even when the machine is heavily loaded. I would expect more advanced OS's to use a much better scheduler to make better use of the other CPU. jm -- My other computer is your Windows box. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message