On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 05:50:44PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Steve Kargl
> > wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 04:33:44PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
> >>>
> >>> For the record, I wo
Hi,
[re-sent publicly, I did not "Replied-to-all":)]
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Steve Kargl
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 04:33:44PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
>>>
>>> For the record, I would like to see enforced pub
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Steve Kargl
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 04:33:44PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
>>
>> For the record, I would like to see enforced public review for _every_
>> patch *before* it is checked in, as a strong rule. gcc system is
>> particularly interesting. B
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 04:33:44PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
>
> For the record, I would like to see enforced public review for _every_
> patch *before* it is checked in, as a strong rule. gcc system is
> particularly interesting. But it is not likely to happen in FreeBSD
> where FreeBSD commit
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 7:45 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> (OT, yes, but I'd like to take a stab at explaining "why" these things
> fall to the wayside..)
>
> On 7 July 2011 12:08, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
>
>> What would be the point to even start looking at an issue? You guys
>> (by "you", I mean
(OT, yes, but I'd like to take a stab at explaining "why" these things
fall to the wayside..)
On 7 July 2011 12:08, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
> What would be the point to even start looking at an issue? You guys
> (by "you", I mean "official" committers on public list) don't care
When someone who h
On 06/07/2011 20:11, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
I've seen exactly this problem with multi-threaded math libraries, as
well. Using parallel GotoBLAS on FreeBSD gives terrible performance
because the threads keep migrating between CPUs, causing frequent cache
misses.
On both schedulers?
__
Steve Kargl wrote:
> Let's face, ULE is not a silver bullet.
Or perhaps it is, but this particular problem is so heavily armored
as to demand depleted uranium :)
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/f
On 07/06/11 23:49, Oliver Pinter wrote:
On 7/6/11, Hartmann, O. wrote:
On 07/06/11 21:36, Steve Kargl wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 03:18:35PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Steve Kargl
wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:39 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 7 July 2011 09:51, Steve Kargl wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 09:17:51AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>>> Offer a bounty for getting it fixed?
>>>
>>
>> steve == ENOMONEY && jeffr == ENOTIME
>>
>> And, 4BSD works.
>
> I meant it as a
On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 10:39:00AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 7 July 2011 09:51, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 09:17:51AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> >> Offer a bounty for getting it fixed?
> >>
> >
> > steve == ENOMONEY && jeffr == ENOTIME
> >
> > And, 4BSD works.
>
> I me
On 7 July 2011 09:51, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 09:17:51AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> Offer a bounty for getting it fixed?
>>
>
> steve == ENOMONEY && jeffr == ENOTIME
>
> And, 4BSD works.
I meant it as a more general observation.
If something doesn't work as needed, consid
On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 09:17:51AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Offer a bounty for getting it fixed?
>
steve == ENOMONEY && jeffr == ENOTIME
And, 4BSD works.
--
Steve
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/lis
Offer a bounty for getting it fixed?
thanks,
Adrian
On 7 July 2011 05:00, Hartmann, O. wrote:
> On 07/06/11 21:36, Steve Kargl wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 03:18:35PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Steve Kargl
>>> wrote:
O
On 7/6/11, Hartmann, O. wrote:
> On 07/06/11 21:36, Steve Kargl wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 03:18:35PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Steve Kargl
>>> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
> I use SCHED_UL
On 07/06/11 13:00, Steve Kargl wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:05:41PM +, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message<20110706170132.ga68...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, Steve Kargl w
rites:
I periodically ran the same type test in the 2008 post over the
last three years. Nothing has changed.
On 07/06/11 21:36, Steve Kargl wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 03:18:35PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Steve Kargl
wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing
b
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Steve Kargl
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
>>
>> I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing
>> better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of suggestions switching
>> back to the old SCHED_4B
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 03:18:35PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Steve Kargl
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
> >>
> >> I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing
> >> better on multicor
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:05:41PM +, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <20110706170132.ga68...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, Steve Kargl
> w
> rites:
>
> >I periodically ran the same type test in the 2008 post over the
> >last three years. Nothing has changed. I even set up an account
In message <20110706170132.ga68...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, Steve Kargl w
rites:
>I periodically ran the same type test in the 2008 post over the
>last three years. Nothing has changed. I even set up an account
>on one node in my cluster for jeffr to use. He was too busy to
>investigate a
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 06:38:23PM +0200, Hartmann, O. wrote:
> On 07/06/11 18:28, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
> >>I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing
> >>better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of sugge
Has anyone re-run those IO benchmarks?
Something smells fishy there.. (with the benchmarking.)
adrian
2011/7/6 O. Hartmann :
> On 07/06/11 12:37, arrowdodger wrote:
>>
>> 2011/7/6 O. Hartmann
>>
>>> When performing an update on the ports tree via "portsnap fetch update"
>>> or
>>> when checking
On 07/06/11 18:28, Steve Kargl wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing
better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of suggestions switching
back to the old SCHED_4BSD scheduler.
If you are usin
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
>
> I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing
> better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of suggestions switching
> back to the old SCHED_4BSD scheduler.
>
If you are using MPI in numerical codes, th
On 07/06/11 12:37, arrowdodger wrote:
2011/7/6 O. Hartmann
When performing an update on the ports tree via "portsnap fetch update" or
when checking out (or) large Subversion repositories or when copying large
data files (~ 50 to 250 GB in size, results from numerical modelings) or
when compilin
On Wed Jul 6 11, arrowdodger wrote:
> 2011/7/6 O. Hartmann
>
> > When performing an update on the ports tree via "portsnap fetch update" or
> > when checking out (or) large Subversion repositories or when copying large
> > data files (~ 50 to 250 GB in size, results from numerical modelings) or
2011/7/6 O. Hartmann
> When performing an update on the ports tree via "portsnap fetch update" or
> when checking out (or) large Subversion repositories or when copying large
> data files (~ 50 to 250 GB in size, results from numerical modelings) or
> when compiling world, FreeBD 9.0 and FreeBSD
2011/7/6 O. Hartmann :
Could you post /etc/sysctl.conf and /boot/loader.conf? Also, the
output of uname -a on all machines would be nice.
And since you don't use GENERIC, could you also tell us what
difference your setup is from a GENERIC kernel?
--
chs,
29 matches
Mail list logo
