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 +0100, O. Hartmann wrote:
> >>
> >>> Not fully right, boinc defaults to run on idprio 31 so this isn't an
> >
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 01:03:30PM -0600, Scott Lambert wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 09:06:04AM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > Tuning kern.sched.preempt_thresh did not seem to help for
> > my workload. My code is a classic master-slave OpenMPI
> > application where the ma
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 04:18:35PM +, Bruce Cran wrote:
> On 12/12/2011 15:51, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >This comes up every 9 months or so, and must be approaching FAQ
> >status. In a HPC environment, I recommend 4BSD. Depending on the
> >workload, ULE can cause a severe in
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 02:47:57PM +0100, O. Hartmann wrote:
>
> > Not fully right, boinc defaults to run on idprio 31 so this isn't an
> > issue. And yes, there are cases where SCHED_ULE shows much better
> > performance then SCHED_4BSD. [...]
>
> Do we have any proof at hand for such cases whe
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 11:22:17PM +0200, Hartmann, O. wrote:
> On 08/30/11 21:47, Pedro F. Giffuni wrote:
> >
> >Christopher Bergstr?m and Pathscale delivered the EKOPath
> >Compiler Suite, but no one followed up:
> >
> >(From the WantedPorts Wiki)
> >https://github.com/pathscale/path64-suite
> >
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 10:59:43PM +, Alexander Best wrote:
>
> well i did exactly what they did in the video. watch a 1080p video and move
> the output window around while compiling the kernel.
>
It is trivial to bring ULE to its knees. If you
have N cores then all you need is N+1 cpu int
