Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1
ohartman at zedat.fu-berlin.de
Thu Dec 15 18:00:47 UTC 2011
Am 12/15/11 14:58, schrieb Daniel Kalchev:
> On Dec 15, 2011, at 3:48 PM, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
>> That said: thrown out, data ignored, done.
>> Now what? Where are we? We're right back where we were a day or two
>> ago; meaning no closer to solving the dilemma reported by users and
>> SCHED_ULE. Heck, we're not even sure if there is an issue, other than
>> some folks confirming that SCHED_4BSD performs better for them (that's
>> what started this whole thread), and there are at least a couple which
>> have stated this.
> But, are any of these benchmarks really engaging the 4BSD/ULE scheduler differences? Most such benchmarks are run on a system with no other load whatsoever and in no way represent real world experience.
> What is more, I believe in such benchmarks "the system feels sluggish" is not measured at all. Even if it is measured, if in such case the benchmark finishes "better" - that is, faster, or say, makes the system freeze for the user for the duration of the test -- it will be considered "win", because the benchmark suite ran faster on that particular system -- whereas a system which ran the benchmark fast, provided good interactive response etc would be considered "loser".
I guess you have some proofs on that "feeling"?
> I think it is not good idea to hijack this thread, but instead focusing on the other SCHED_ULE bashing thread to define an reasonable benchmark or a set of benchmarks rather -- so that many would run it and provide feedback.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/attachments/20111215/ac8ff9d4/signature.pgp
More information about the freebsd-current