From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Apr 16 12:46:00 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 798B1106566C
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Wed, 16 Apr 2008 12:46:00 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from roberthuff@rcn.com)
Received: from smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net (smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net
	[207.172.157.102])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31D5F8FC1F
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Wed, 16 Apr 2008 12:45:59 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from roberthuff@rcn.com)
Received: from mr08.lnh.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.157.28])
	by smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net with ESMTP; 16 Apr 2008 08:46:00 -0400
Received: from smtp01.lnh.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.lnh.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.11])
	by mr08.lnh.mail.rcn.net (MOS 3.8.6-GA) with ESMTP id JVT60459;
	Wed, 16 Apr 2008 08:45:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from 209-6-22-188.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com (HELO
	jerusalem.litteratus.org.litteratus.org) ([209.6.22.188])
	by smtp01.lnh.mail.rcn.net with ESMTP; 16 Apr 2008 08:45:56 -0400
From: Robert Huff <roberthuff@rcn.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <18437.62724.679769.189650@jerusalem.litteratus.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 08:45:56 -0400
To: "Stanislav Antic" <lists.stanislav.antic@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <282f7f940804152334m1c03d300xffd8e3c350c22822@mail.gmail.com>
References: <200804152159.46589.daniel.tourde@spray.se>
	<alpine.BSF.1.10.0804160027060.2352@duane.dbq.yournetplus.com>
	<18437.34871.726719.679184@jerusalem.litteratus.org>
	<282f7f940804152332y4f5cadfdob9d3957dcb265a57@mail.gmail.com>
	<282f7f940804152334m1c03d300xffd8e3c350c22822@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.5  (beta28) "fuki" XEmacs Lucid
X-Junkmail-Whitelist: YES (by domain whitelist at mr08.lnh.mail.rcn.net)
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: How to switch scheduler on 7.0?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
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: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 12:46:00 -0000


Stanislav Antic writes:

>  >        ULE has substantial improvements over BSD for multiprocessor
>  > hardware.
>  >
>  Does ULE works better on a single CPU machines?

	I an not an expert; however, based on material reported here:
	In terms of perforance, ULE and BSD are equivalent on UP
machines - BSD works better in some cases, ULE in others.  If I had
to put money down, I'd give a very slight advantage to ULE.
	Measured by stability, ULE is a moderate win.
	Absent specific cases to the contrary, one reason to go with
ULE is that it where future development is focused.  That's not to
say BSD is being kicked off the train, exactly, just that it won't
be the target for the latest and greatest.

	More qualified voices will please tell what I have remembered
wrong.


				Robert Huff