Re: Progress on scaling of FreeBSD on 8 CPU systems

On 2/24/07, Kris Kennaway <kris_at_obsecurity.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 05:47:55AM +0000, Coleman Kane wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 12:41:20AM -0500, Kris Kennaway wrote, and it
> was proclaimed:
> > > On Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 10:00:35PM -0700, Coleman Kane wrote:
> > >
> > > > What does the performance curve look like for the in-CVS 7-CURRENT
> tree with
> > > > 4BSD or ULE ? How do those stand up against the Linux SMP scheduler
> for
> > > > scalability. It would be nice to see the comparison displayed to see
> what
> > > > the performance improvements of the aforementioned patch were
> realized to.
> > > > This would likely be a nice graphics for the SMPng project page,
> BTW...
> > >
> > > There are graphs of this on Jeff's blog, referenced in that URL.
> > > Fixing filedesc locking makes a HUGE difference.
> > >
> > > Kris
> >
> > Thanks. I saw that shortly after I sent the email... /me stupid.
> >
> > How stable is ULE now since the recent swath of rewrites in the past
> months?
>
> I think what is in CVS for 7.x is pretty stable.  One of the difficult
> things with schedulers is making sure that all workloads perform well,
> so testing in different environments is always helpful.
>
> Kris
>
> P.S. ULE in 6.x is still not recommended, but hopefully the fixes can
> be merged at some point.


I primarily use  7-CURRENT on my laptop. At some point I had ULE enabled
just to share my experiences with development. What is the status with ULE
on UP systems? Is it expected to be on-par or better than 4BSD, or is it now
only recommended for MP?

--
coleman