On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 10:44:21PM +0200, Vallo Kallaste
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm using SCHED_ULE on my laptop now. My recent round of fixes seems to
> > have helped out. I'm getting good interactive performance. I'm doing the
> > following:
> >
> > nice -5'd for (;;) {} process.
> > make -j4 buildworld
> >
> > Mozilla, pine, irc, screen, vi, etc.
> >
> > All interactive tasks are very responsive. My nice -5'd looping process
> > is getting 70% of the cpu and my compile is taking the rest. nice +20 may
> > not behave as well as in sched_4bsd right now. I'm going to work on that.
> >
> > This is on a 2ghz laptop though so your mileage may vary. Use reports are
> > welcome.
>
> Much improved, can work while two [EMAIL PROTECTED] processes run at nice
> 19. Still takes more time to show directory listing (ls -la) compared
> to scheduler and the listing itself is a bit "jumpy". Scrolls about
> 20 lines, then waits for a moment, then scrolls forward again and so
> on. The stopping moments are actually very short, but noticeable.
> This is while the seti's are running, 2CPU PIII-500.
Althought much better, KDE is still almost unusable, XFree and KDE
startup takes a lot more time and starting plain xterm under KDE
takes x3 time than usual. When I kill one of the seti processes, all
comes down to normal. The one remaining seti process takes 53% of
CPU constantly. Don't know how top calculates process CPU usage, but
if the 100% is spread over the two processors, then the seti process
monopolises one of the processors constantly. Doesn't matter will it
run nice 19 or idprio 31.
--
Vallo Kallaste
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
