Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 22:44:21 +0200 From: Vallo Kallaste <kalts@estpak.ee> To: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SCHED_ULE ok again. feedback please? Message-ID: <20030306204421.GA5095@kevad.internal> In-Reply-To: <20030304011700.C62398-100000@mail.chesapeake.net> References: <20030304011700.C62398-100000@mail.chesapeake.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 01:25:24AM -0500, Jeff Roberson
<jroberson@chesapeake.net> wrote:
> I'm using SCHED_ULE on my laptop now. My recent round of fixes seems to
> have helped out. I'm getting good interactive performance. I'm doing the
> following:
>
> nice -5'd for (;;) {} process.
> make -j4 buildworld
>
> Mozilla, pine, irc, screen, vi, etc.
>
> All interactive tasks are very responsive. My nice -5'd looping process
> is getting 70% of the cpu and my compile is taking the rest. nice +20 may
> not behave as well as in sched_4bsd right now. I'm going to work on that.
>
> This is on a 2ghz laptop though so your mileage may vary. Use reports are
> welcome.
Much improved, can work while two seti@home processes run at nice
19. Still takes more time to show directory listing (ls -la) compared
to scheduler and the listing itself is a bit "jumpy". Scrolls about
20 lines, then waits for a moment, then scrolls forward again and so
on. The stopping moments are actually very short, but noticeable.
This is while the seti's are running, 2CPU PIII-500.
--
Vallo Kallaste
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030306204421.GA5095>