On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Jeff Roberson wrote:
On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Bruce Evans wrote:
On Sun, 30 Sep 2007, Jeff Roberson wrote:
On Sat, 29 Sep 2007, Kevin Oberman wrote:
YMMV, but ULE seems to generally work better then 4BSD for interactive
uniprocessor systems. The preferred scheduler for uniprocessor servers
is less clear, but many test have shown ULE does better for those
systems in the majority of cases.
I feel it's safe to say desktop behavior on UP is definitely superior.
This is unsafe to say.
Given that the overwhelming amount of feedback by qualified poeple, I think
it's fair to say that ULE gives a more responsive system under load.
This is not my experience. Maybe I don't run enough interactive bloatware
to have a large enough interactive load for the scheduler to make a
difference.
Bruce
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
