On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 11:23 PM, Lucius Windschuh <lwindsc...@googlemail.com> wrote: > 2010/11/18 Bruce Cran <br...@cran.org.uk>: >>Have you tried increasing kern.sched.preempt_thresh? According to >>http://groups.google.com/group/mailing.freebsd.stable/browse_thread/thread/05a39f816fd8acc6/82affa9f195b747d?lnk=raot&fwc=1&pli=1 >>a good value for desktop use would be 224. > > Hmm, I though I tried this -- but this helps indeed. :-) > The browser, movie player etc. behave much better when a "make -j4 > buildworld" is running on my 2-core machine in the background. Thank > you. > > 2010/11/18 Bruce Cran <br...@cran.org.uk>: >> If you're using UFS, I've found it to be quite a bottleneck when >> doing parallel IO: I even ran a "svn up" in one terminal and tried to >> login on another a couple of days ago only to find the motd took over 5 >> seconds to appear! That may be excessive since I was running a kernel >> with WITNESS and INVARIANTS, but I've found ZFS to be far better if you >> want good interactivity when reading/writing to disks. > > This is indeed another issue, which I also encountered, but explicitly > left out since I don't blame the task scheduler for that. ;) > > Unfortunately, I don't know how much SCHED_ULE's inability to cope > with more runnable threads than cores, as Steve mentioned, accounts to > the problem I observe. Time to switch back to SCHED_4BSD? *sigh*
OT: Compare building kernel on tmpfs vs ufs on mdX vs ufs on usb stick and guess what is faster and does not cause non interactive mouse movement. _______________________________________________ freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
