Re: CURRENT as gateway on not-so-fast hardware: where is a bottlneck?

From: Dimitry Andric <dimitry_at_andric.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 09:18:10 +0200

On 2012-08-15 02:09, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 08/14/2012 12:20 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
...
>> Maybe things aren't being scheduled correctly and the added latency is
>> killing performance?
>
> You might also try switching to SCHED_ULE to see if it helps.

Most likely, s/ULE/4BSD/ here, and in the rest of your mail? :)

Received on Wed Aug 15 2012 - 05:18:11 UTC

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: FreeBSD Tinderbox: "[head tinderbox] failure on arm/arm"
Previous message: Aryeh Friedman: "(i)frame based sites cause horrible performence in firefox 14.0.1"
In reply to: Doug Barton: "Re: CURRENT as gateway on not-so-fast hardware: where is a bottlneck?"
Next in thread: Doug Barton: "Re: CURRENT as gateway on not-so-fast hardware: where is a bottlneck?"
Reply: Doug Barton: "Re: CURRENT as gateway on not-so-fast hardware: where is a bottlneck?"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:29 UTC