From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Mar 27 00:13:57 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59B0A16A4CE
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 27 Mar 2005 00:13:57 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.200])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF4EC43D4C
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 27 Mar 2005 00:13:56 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from linicks@gmail.com)
Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 71so22892wra
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Sat, 26 Mar 2005 16:13:56 -0800 (PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
	s=beta; d=gmail.com;
	h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references;
	b=L2/Y2miJvG1wOSFwbERPWlmVrS4A1aHneRxuVrS3fzt1IWlyjawhGIuZc3dThA/xZdyLB+m5Y2fO06zm3OeARm/DMOfk4wYi3OdK/o6ba0p9IzTsh8zGj95LszLWwBpQim9NZKgdPjw7txIM34M/5V3uP1ug0sYN8trL2/NdC3w=
Received: by 10.54.51.64 with SMTP id y64mr902299wry;
        Sat, 26 Mar 2005 16:13:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.54.98.3 with HTTP; Sat, 26 Mar 2005 16:13:56 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <dc9ba04405032616131b7f824d@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:13:56 -0700
From: Nick Pavlica <linicks@gmail.com>
To: John Pettitt <jpp@cloudview.com>
In-Reply-To: <4245F61E.2000300@cloudview.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <c6ef380c050326061976f164b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1641928994.20050326192811@wanadoo.fr>
	 <8C700529A2DFD74-A44-3A157@mblk-d34.sysops.aol.com>
	 <439876144.20050326220638@wanadoo.fr>
	 <8C7006AE7E80573-FAC-3B652@mblk-r28.sysops.aol.com>
	 <49251524.20050326234521@wanadoo.fr>
	 <20050326232753.GA64620@grover.logicsquad.net>
	 <4245F61E.2000300@cloudview.com>
cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: hyper threading.
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Nick Pavlica <linicks@gmail.com>
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>,
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>,
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 00:13:57 -0000

Hello,

> However even then this is not a good test of HT - the point of HT is to
> improve throughput in multi thread workloads and the benchmark suite is
> basically single thread.    What would be more interesting would be to
> run a test with a constant background load also running.    In theory
> the HT should do a better job of balancing the load between the
> benchmark and the background than the BSD scheduler can on it's own.   I
> don't have an HT box here or I'd try it but I'd love to know how it
> comes out if somebody is up for it.

It would be interesting to see the results of the BSD & ULE scheduler
on 5.4 Pre and 6 compared to 5.3R.

--Nick

--Nick