From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Aug 16 10:47:17 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 EE20337B400 for ; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 10:47:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lerlaptop.iadfw.net (lerlaptop.iadfw.net [206.66.13.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7858743E7B for ; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 10:47:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ler@lerctr.org) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lerlaptop.iadfw.net (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g7GHjnCp061489; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 12:45:53 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ler@lerctr.org) Subject: Re: When to consider the new scehduler? From: Larry Rosenman To: Jonathon McKitrick Cc: Terry Lambert , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <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> <20020816171138.GA60820@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 Date: 16 Aug 2002 12:45:49 -0500 Message-Id: <1029519957.477.37.camel@lerlaptop.iadfw.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) 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, 2002-08-16 at 12:11, Jonathon McKitrick wrote: > 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. OIC. Just trying to get more information out. LER -- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: ler@lerctr.org US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message