Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 15:11:11 -0700 From: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> To: "b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com> Cc: jeff@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: new to amd64 Message-ID: <20090918221111.GA5821@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <d873d5be0909181449h55c87dfdp280d1fd3a7d5749a@mail.gmail.com> References: <d873d5be0909181449h55c87dfdp280d1fd3a7d5749a@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 09:49:57PM +0000, b. f. wrote: > Steve Kargl wrote: > > > >If you are running any floating point intensive applications > >and these applications are multithreaded, you may want to use > >the 4BSD scheduler rathar than ULE. The last time I tested > >ULE with an MPI application, it display miserable performance > >on a dual, quad-core opteron system. > > Have you made any attempt to analyze this problem, or discussed it > with the primary author of ULE? yes and yes. > If so, to what do you attribute the poor performance, and do you > have any ideas on how to improve ULE performance in this context? The only acceptable solution I found was to switch to 4BSD. -- Steve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090918221111.GA5821>