On Tue, 17 Jul 2007, Attilio Rao wrote: > 2007/7/17, Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri <almarrie_at_gmail.com>: >> On 7/17/07, Jeff Roberson <jroberson_at_chesapeake.net> wrote: >> > With regards to buildkernel times; I do not want to sacrafice performance >> > on other benchmarks to improve buildkernel. The problem is that 4BSD is >> > as agressive as possible at scheduling work on idle cores. This behavior >> > that helps one buildworld hurts on other, in my opinion, more important >> > benchmarks. >> > >> > For example: http://people.freebsd.org/~jeff/sysbench.png >> > >> > ULE is 33% faster than SCHED_4BSD at this mysql test. This is a direct >> > result of prefering to idle to make more efficient scheduling decisions. >> > ULE is also faster at various networking benchmarks for similar reasons. >> > >> > I also believe that while the real time may be slower on buildworld the >> > system and user time will be smaller by a degree greater than the delta in >> > real time. This means that while you're building packages you have a >> > little more cpu time leftover to handle other tasks. Furthermore, as the >> > number of cores goes up things start to tip in favor of ULE although this >> > is somewhat because it's harder for even 4BSD to keep them busy due to >> > disk bandwidth. >> > >> > Thanks everyone for testing. Can someone confirm that they have tested >> > with x86 rather than amd64? I will probably commit later today. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Jeff >> >> Did you compare it to latest Linux fixes? is FreeBSD + ULE + MySQL >> still faster than linux? > > Just look at the link Jeff posted, it seems very well explaining :). > > Attilio > > > -- > Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein Unfortunately those results are still based on 2.6.20, not 2.6.22 (2 minor patch revision difference). I assume that that's for a vanilla Linux kernel? -GarrettReceived on Tue Jul 17 2007 - 17:41:59 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:14 UTC
