Hi all I have noted early April that RELENG_7 is upgraded to sched_ule by default and gave it a try with sched_ule until today. My desktop is a 3GHz single Intel Pentium 4 processor with 512MB RAM. I have noted by desktop response wise sched_4bsd is better, ie. the desktop is more responsive. It just noted today the version of the sched_ule.c on RELENG_7 is 1.214.2.2 dated 2007/12/20 and the current version on the CVS is 1.240 dated 2008/04/04. Since the FreeBSD 7.1 is planned to be released with sched_ule by default, why don't you guys sync the sched_ule.c with current so that more users like me who run FreeBSD 7.X (RELENG_7) can give more feedback? Kind regards Unga __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
>Hi all>I have noted early April that RELENG_7 is upgraded to >sched_ule by default and gave it a try with sched_ule >until today. My desktop is a 3GHz single Intel Pentium >4 processor with 512MB RAM. I have noted by desktop >response wise sched_4bsd is better, ie. the desktop is >more responsive.>It just noted today the version of the sched_ule.c on >RELENG_7 is 1.214.2.2 dated 2007/12/20 and the current >version on the CVS is 1.240 dated 2008/04/04.>Since the FreeBSD 7.1 is planned to be released with >sched_ule by default, why don't you guys sync the >sched_ule.c with current so that more users like me >who run FreeBSD 7.X (RELENG_7) can give more feedback?>Kind regards >UngaThe version you mentioned is in CURRENT (8.0) and proberly is not compatible with RELENG_7 at the moment. There have been a lot of changes to the scheduling and other stuff commited by jeff, read jeff's techjournal! I recall also in the mailing list that not all of those changes are being commited to RELENG_7 Regards, Johan Hendriks Double L Automatisering
> I have noted early April that RELENG_7 is upgraded to > sched_ule by default and gave it a try with sched_ule > until today. My desktop is a 3GHz single Intel Pentium > 4 processor with 512MB RAM. I have noted by desktop > response wise sched_4bsd is better, ie. the desktop is > more responsive.Very curious - when I first installed 7.0 the desktop performance was horrible and people told me to switch from BSd to ULE shceduler. Which I did and it was much better, and I have used ULE on all machines even since. I amm surprised that you find it worse - what are the symptoms here ? -pete.
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 09:53:13PM -0700, Unga wrote:> I have noted early April that RELENG_7 is upgraded to > sched_ule by default and gave it a try with sched_ule > until today. My desktop is a 3GHz single Intel Pentium > 4 processor with 512MB RAM. I have noted by desktop > response wise sched_4bsd is better, ie. the desktop is > more responsive. > > It just noted today the version of the sched_ule.c on > RELENG_7 is 1.214.2.2 dated 2007/12/20 and the current > version on the CVS is 1.240 dated 2008/04/04. > > Since the FreeBSD 7.1 is planned to be released with > sched_ule by default, why don't you guys sync the > sched_ule.c with current so that more users like me > who run FreeBSD 7.X (RELENG_7) can give more feedback?There was a commit to the ULE code in RELENG_7 approximately 6 hours ago by Jeff, indicating some speed improvements in ULE when there's heavy IRQ activity, and adjustments in the timeslicing code for threads which don't utilise timesharing: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/kern/sched_ule.c Can you update your src-all tree to pull this in, rebuild the kernel, and tell us if it behaves better for you? -- | Jeremy Chadwick jdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB |