On 04/17/18 19:01, George Mitchell wrote:
> On 04/17/18 17:20, EBFE via freebsd-stable wrote:
>> [...]
>> For interactive tasks, there is a "special" tunable:
>> % sysctl kern.sched.interact
>> kern.sched.interact: 10 # default is 30
>> % sysctl -d kern.sched.interact
>> kern.sched.interact: Intera
19.04.2018 0:59, Peter wrote:
> thank You very much for Your commenting and reports!
>
> From what I see, we have (at least) two rather different demands here:
> while George looks at the over-all speed of compute throughput, others are
> concerned about interactive response.
>
> My own issue
Hi all of You,
thank You very much for Your commenting and reports!
From what I see, we have (at least) two rather different demands here:
while George looks at the over-all speed of compute throughput, others
are concerned about interactive response.
My own issue is again a little bit dif
EBFE via freebsd-stable wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 09:05:48 -0700
Freddie Cash wrote:
# Tune for desktop usage
kern.sched.preempt_thresh=224
Works quite nicely on a 4-core AMD Phenom-II X4 960T Processor
(3010.09-MHz K8-class CPU) running KDE4 using an Nvidia 210 GPU.
For interactive tasks
On 04/17/18 17:20, EBFE via freebsd-stable wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 09:05:48 -0700
> Freddie Cash wrote:
>
>> # Tune for desktop usage
>> kern.sched.preempt_thresh=224
>>
>> Works quite nicely on a 4-core AMD Phenom-II X4 960T Processor
>> (3010.09-MHz K8-class CPU) running KDE4 using an Nvi
On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 09:05:48 -0700
Freddie Cash wrote:
> # Tune for desktop usage
> kern.sched.preempt_thresh=224
>
> Works quite nicely on a 4-core AMD Phenom-II X4 960T Processor
> (3010.09-MHz K8-class CPU) running KDE4 using an Nvidia 210 GPU.
For interactive tasks, there is a "special" tu
On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 8:49 AM, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 11:56 PM, Eivind Nicolay Evensen <
> eivi...@terraplane.org> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 04, 2018 at 09:32:58AM -0400, George Mitchell wrote:
> > > On 04/04/18 06:39, Alban Hertroys wrote:
> > > > [...]
> > > > That said
On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 11:56 PM, Eivind Nicolay Evensen <
eivi...@terraplane.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 04, 2018 at 09:32:58AM -0400, George Mitchell wrote:
> > On 04/04/18 06:39, Alban Hertroys wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > That said, SCHED_ULE (the default scheduler for quite a while now) was
> desig
On Wed, Apr 04, 2018 at 09:32:58AM -0400, George Mitchell wrote:
> On 04/04/18 06:39, Alban Hertroys wrote:
> > [...]
> > That said, SCHED_ULE (the default scheduler for quite a while now) was
> > designed with multi-CPU configurations in mind and there are claims that
> > SCHED_4BSD works better
On 7/4/18 10:21 pm, Peter wrote:
Julian Elischer wrote:
for a single CPU you really should compile a kernel with SMP turned
off
and 4BSD scheduler.
ULE is just trying too hard to do stuff you don't need.
Julian,
if we agree on this, I am fine.
(This implies that SCHED_4BSD will *not* be ret
Julian Elischer wrote:
for a single CPU you really should compile a kernel with SMP turned off
and 4BSD scheduler.
ULE is just trying too hard to do stuff you don't need.
Julian,
if we agree on this, I am fine.
(This implies that SCHED_4BSD will *not* be retired for an indefinite time!)
I te
On 4/4/18 9:32 pm, George Mitchell wrote:
On 04/04/18 06:39, Alban Hertroys wrote:
[...]
That said, SCHED_ULE (the default scheduler for quite a while now) was designed
with multi-CPU configurations in mind and there are claims that SCHED_4BSD
works better for single-CPU configurations. You ma
Eugene Grosbein wrote:
I see no reasons to use SHED_ULE for such single core systems and use SCHED_BSD.
Nitpicking: it is not a single core system, it's a dual that for now is
equipped with only one chip, the other is in the shelf.
But seriously, I am currently working myself through the de
04.04.2018 21:16, Peter wrote:
> // With nCPU compute-bound processes running, with SCHED_ULE, any other
> // process that is interactive (which to me means frequently waiting for
> // I/O) gets ABYSMAL performance -- over an order of magnitude worse
> // than it gets with SCHED_4BSD under the sam
Andriy Gapon wrote:
Not everyone has a postgres server and a suitable database.
Could you please devise a test scenario that demonstrates the problem and that
anyone could run?
Alright, simple things first: I can reproduce the effect without
postgres, with regular commands. I run this on my d
Andriy Gapon wrote:
On 04/04/2018 03:52, Peter wrote:
Lets run an I/O-active task, e.g, postgres VACUUM that would
continuousely read from big files (while doing compute as well [1]):
Not everyone has a postgres server and a suitable database.
Could you please devise a test scenario that demon
On 04/04/2018 03:52, Peter wrote:
> Lets run an I/O-active task, e.g, postgres VACUUM that would
> continuousely read from big files (while doing compute as well [1]):
Not everyone has a postgres server and a suitable database.
Could you please devise a test scenario that demonstrates the problem
On 04/04/18 10:34, Peter wrote:
> [...] It does not make sense to me if now we state that
> we cannot do it anymore because single-CPU is uncommon today.
> [...]
+1.-- George
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi Alban!
Alban Hertroys wrote:
Occasionally I noticed that the system would not quickly process the
tasks i need done, but instead prefer other, longrunning tasks. I
figured it must be related to the scheduler, and decided it hates me.
If it hated you, it would behave much worse.
Thats enco
George Mitchell wrote:
On 04/04/18 06:39, Alban Hertroys wrote:
[...]
That said, SCHED_ULE (the default scheduler for quite a while now) was designed
with multi-CPU configurations in mind and there are claims that SCHED_4BSD
works better for single-CPU configurations. You may give that a try,
On 04/04/18 06:39, Alban Hertroys wrote:
> [...]
> That said, SCHED_ULE (the default scheduler for quite a while now) was
> designed with multi-CPU configurations in mind and there are claims that
> SCHED_4BSD works better for single-CPU configurations. You may give that a
> try, if you're not a
Am 04.04.18 um 12:39 schrieb Alban Hertroys:
>
>> On 4 Apr 2018, at 2:52, Peter wrote:
>>
>> Occasionally I noticed that the system would not quickly process the
>> tasks i need done, but instead prefer other, longrunning tasks. I
>> figured it must be related to the scheduler, and decided it hat
> On 4 Apr 2018, at 2:52, Peter wrote:
>
> Occasionally I noticed that the system would not quickly process the
> tasks i need done, but instead prefer other, longrunning tasks. I
> figured it must be related to the scheduler, and decided it hates me.
If it hated you, it would behave much worse
23 matches
Mail list logo