At 17:45 18/10/2011, Ivan Klymenko wrote:
Ð Tue, 18 Oct 2011 16:30:22 +0100
Vincent Hoffman <[email protected]> пиÑеÑ:
> On 18/10/2011 16:24, Ivan Klymenko wrote:
> > Ð Tue, 18 Oct 2011 23:02:47 +0800
> > Adrian Chadd <[email protected]> пиÑеÑ:
> >
> >> What is FBFS?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Adrian
> > :)
> > http://rudot.blog.com/
> or
> http://wiki.freebsd.org/RudolfTomori/rudotSoC2011
>
> The blog entry was interesting in that it gives some context to the 2
> images you previously posted as does the wiki entry.
>
> Vince
they are very different four images - made on different systems
Forgive me for offtopic :(
I think it's on topic. Andriy Gapon requested any
facts that demostrates or shows examples when ULE
scheduler is not so good than others. The images
shows how the 3 schedulers performs with the same
workload when number of cores is changed. Perhaps
it's not a scientific and statistically valid
but, for me, it shows when is ULE under other schedulers.
Also, some people has asked and pointed about
using 4BSD and not ULE in 8.x because it works
better for some type of workload.
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
