Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

2011-12-14 Thread Adrian Chadd
On 14 December 2011 23:32, O. Hartmann wrote: > Just saw this shot benchmark on Phoronix dot com today: > > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTAyNzA > > It may be worth to discuss the sad performance of FBSD in some parts of > the benchmark. A difference of a factor 10 or 100 is

Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

2011-12-14 Thread O. Hartmann
Just saw this shot benchmark on Phoronix dot com today: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTAyNzA It may be worth to discuss the sad performance of FBSD in some parts of the benchmark. A difference of a factor 10 or 100 is simply far beyond disapointing, it is more than inaccepta

NEWS: NVIDIA Open-Sources Its CUDA Compiler

2011-12-14 Thread O. Hartmann
Just read this on phoronix.com Is this finally a chance to get GPGPU on FreeBSD natively supported? nVidia has a binary driver, supporting well their higher end graphics cards on FreeBSD 64bit natively. I do not understand much about the compiler itself, it's "nvcc" as far as I know, and it is

Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default

2011-12-14 Thread Andrey Chernov
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 02:22:48AM -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 13 December 2011 01:00, Andrey Chernov wrote: > > >> If the algorithm ULE does not contain problems - it means the problem > >> has Core2Duo, or in a piece of code that uses the ULE scheduler. > > > > I observe ULE interactivity s

Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default

2011-12-14 Thread Marcus Reid
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 04:29:14PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > On 12/12/2011 05:47, O. Hartmann wrote: > > Do we have any proof at hand for such cases where SCHED_ULE performs > > much better than SCHED_4BSD? > > I complained about poor interactive performance of ULE in a desktop > environment for

Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default

2011-12-14 Thread Jilles Tjoelker
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 10:40:48AM +0200, Ivan Klymenko wrote: > If the algorithm ULE does not contain problems - it means the problem > has Core2Duo, or in a piece of code that uses the ULE scheduler. > I already wrote in a mailing list that specifically in my case (Core2Duo) > partially helps the

Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default

2011-12-14 Thread Doug Barton
On 12/13/2011 13:31, Malin Randstrom wrote: > stop sending me spam mail ... you never stop despite me having unsubscribeb > several times. stop this! If you had actually unsubscribed, the mail would have stopped. :) You can see the instructions you need to follow below. > ___

Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default

2011-12-14 Thread Malin Randstrom
stop sending me spam mail ... you never stop despite me having unsubscribeb several times. stop this! On Dec 13, 2011 8:12 PM, "Steve Kargl" wrote: > On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 02:23:46PM +0100, O. Hartmann wrote: > > On 12/12/11 16:51, Steve Kargl wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 02:47:57PM +01

Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default

2011-12-14 Thread Ivan Klymenko
В Wed, 14 Dec 2011 21:34:35 +0400 Andrey Chernov пишет: > On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 02:22:48AM -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: > > On 13 December 2011 01:00, Andrey Chernov wrote: > > > > >> If the algorithm ULE does not contain problems - it means the > > >> problem has Core2Duo, or in a piece of cod

Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default

2011-12-14 Thread Mike Tancsa
On 12/13/2011 7:01 PM, m...@freebsd.org wrote: > > Has anyone experiencing problems tried to set sysctl > kern.sched.steal_thresh=1 ? > > I don't remember what our specific problem at $WORK was, perhaps it > was just interrupt threads not getting serviced fast enough, but we've > hard-coded this