Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 17 Jul 2007 21:24:52 +0800
From:      lveax <lveax.m@gmail.com>
To:        "Claus Guttesen" <kometen@gmail.com>
Cc:        current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: ULE/SCHED_SMP diff for 7.0
Message-ID:  <576dcbc20707170624kb671fe4ia5ddac21af93eccd@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <b41c75520707170618o4106de94g57e60d2c93a68329@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <20070716233030.D92541@10.0.0.1> <b41c75520707170318r2152b9f0l8d2ec7ea592fe450@mail.gmail.com> <469CACEC.1000103@freebsd.org> <b41c75520707170618o4106de94g57e60d2c93a68329@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>
> sched_ule:
>
> -j 3 buildkernel: 13:23
> -j 4 buildkernel: 12:38
> -j 5 buildkernel: 12:41
> -j 6 buildkernel: 12:47
>
> sched_4bsd:
> -j 3 buildkernel: 11:43
> -j 4 buildkernel: 12:02
>
> So sched_ule seems to handle more processes slightly better than 4bsd
> albeit it does it slower. ule's sweet spot is -j 4 and 4bsd is -j 3.
>
scribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>

4bsd vs ULE

-j 3 buildkernel: 11:43 vs -j 3 buildkernel: 13:23

-j 4 buildkernel: 12:02 vs -j 4 buildkernel: 12:38


ULE is always slower?



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?576dcbc20707170624kb671fe4ia5ddac21af93eccd>