From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 17 18:55:01 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E28F016A404 for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:55:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from almarrie@gmail.com) Received: from an-out-0708.google.com (an-out-0708.google.com [209.85.132.244]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99C9213C4C1 for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:55:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from almarrie@gmail.com) Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id c14so382385anc for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 11:55:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=rrG0L7+cHsihc8JRnVbAV2YRvg8JwDiM1OG/ntunSI4RQAtnq8SDByR3huiRgERJjAunqJ1RNwN3xhSEkK9bsq1qmGlnetNHPvS4l/j6NIedvJREVRkVP73Zw0bCuvdHvZVyLB8pOJPkIz/xz5jJ5/XkEH1XH+GF025hq3XifN8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=ZtIhoSjDzEiMMpm0BfqgVH6TtKhF/QcXZYKwdCq+5qZJ7GnGAET2Hz8F1gAL4Gxl+VX2L6PW8Jc/ExJwS64ZWVseq3fgWALvQexEtNDXLnT+o7tD4QbeGbBSBOvH1yEClxPta2ZtXga4KPIikchiIFjlOUfLk+cQFzSG3fN7Sng= Received: by 10.100.152.9 with SMTP id z9mr392940and.1184698500919; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 11:55:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.9.14 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 11:55:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <499c70c0707171155w318ece06j88f31bc19de8776b@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 21:55:00 +0300 From: "Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri" To: "Jeff Roberson" In-Reply-To: <20070717114147.J92541@10.0.0.1> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20070716233030.D92541@10.0.0.1> <469CACEC.1000103@freebsd.org> <576dcbc20707170624kb671fe4ia5ddac21af93eccd@mail.gmail.com> <20070717114147.J92541@10.0.0.1> Cc: lveax , current@freebsd.org, Claus Guttesen Subject: Re: ULE/SCHED_SMP diff for 7.0, buildkernel & thanks. X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:55:02 -0000 On 7/17/07, Jeff Roberson wrote: > With regards to buildkernel times; I do not want to sacrafice performance > on other benchmarks to improve buildkernel. The problem is that 4BSD is > as agressive as possible at scheduling work on idle cores. This behavior > that helps one buildworld hurts on other, in my opinion, more important > benchmarks. > > For example: http://people.freebsd.org/~jeff/sysbench.png > > ULE is 33% faster than SCHED_4BSD at this mysql test. This is a direct > result of prefering to idle to make more efficient scheduling decisions. > ULE is also faster at various networking benchmarks for similar reasons. > > I also believe that while the real time may be slower on buildworld the > system and user time will be smaller by a degree greater than the delta in > real time. This means that while you're building packages you have a > little more cpu time leftover to handle other tasks. Furthermore, as the > number of cores goes up things start to tip in favor of ULE although this > is somewhat because it's harder for even 4BSD to keep them busy due to > disk bandwidth. > > Thanks everyone for testing. Can someone confirm that they have tested > with x86 rather than amd64? I will probably commit later today. > > Thanks, > Jeff Did you compare it to latest Linux fixes? is FreeBSD + ULE + MySQL still faster than linux? -- Regards, -Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri Arab Portal http://www.WeArab.Net/