On Mon, 2007-10-15 at 21:57 +0200, Roman Divacky wrote: > On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 12:04:08PM -0400, Ken Smith wrote: > > > > I think it's fairly common knowledge by now but... The ULE scheduler is > > "back" and has been doing VERY nicely. We actually had an internal > > discussion about making it the default for 7.0. In the end it was > > decided that ULE "just barely missed the bus". Its performance makes > > giving it a try once 7.0 comes out definitely worthwhile but it was just > > barely "too new" for us to be truly comfortable with changing it to be > > the default. We'd like it to have the exposure of one release cycle > > (7.0-REL) before it becomes the default. For now we're planning to make > > it the default for 7.1-REL. > > will there be an official attitude (faq entry etc.) on that "although > we think that ULE is ready and recomended for XYZ we stick with 4BSD > for 7.0R because ABC". I think such a thing could help marketing 7.0R > when it comes out as people who might benchmark it (with GENERIC kernel) > will know that switching to ULE is the way to go but we want to be 100% > sure before making it default. > > I think it would be beneficial. > > roman I was planning to make something along those lines part of the release announcement and am encouraging its adoption elsewhere. :-) -- Ken Smith - From there to here, from here to | kensmith_at_cse.buffalo.edu there, funny things are everywhere. | - Theodore Geisel |
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:19 UTC