From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 17 19:41:59 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 BF15B16A409; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:41:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from youshi10@u.washington.edu) Received: from mxout2.cac.washington.edu (mxout2.cac.washington.edu [140.142.33.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BD8A13C474; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:41:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from youshi10@u.washington.edu) Received: from hymn01.u.washington.edu (hymn01.u.washington.edu [140.142.8.55]) by mxout2.cac.washington.edu (8.13.7+UW06.06/8.13.7+UW07.06) with ESMTP id l6HJfx9I004981 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:41:59 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hymn01.u.washington.edu (8.13.7+UW06.06/8.13.7+UW07.03) with ESMTP id l6HJfw8J022672; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:41:58 -0700 X-Auth-Received: from [192.55.52.10] by hymn01.u.washington.edu via HTTP; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:41:58 PDT Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:41:58 -0700 (PDT) From: youshi10@u.washington.edu To: Attilio Rao In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe10707171200t4f84084bj8a206268215a9570@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-PMX-Version: 5.3.2.304607, Antispam-Engine: 2.5.1.298604, Antispam-Data: 2007.7.17.122433 X-Uwash-Spam: Gauge=IIIIIII, Probability=7%, Report='NO_REAL_NAME 0, __C230066_P2 0, __CP_URI_IN_BODY 0, __CT 0, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0, __MIME_VERSION 0, __SANE_MSGID 0' Cc: current@freebsd.org 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 19:41:59 -0000 On Tue, 17 Jul 2007, Attilio Rao wrote: > 2007/7/17, Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri : >> 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? > > Just look at the link Jeff posted, it seems very well explaining :). > > Attilio > > > -- > Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein Unfortunately those results are still based on 2.6.20, not 2.6.22 (2 minor patch revision difference). I assume that that's for a vanilla Linux kernel? -Garrett