[RFT][patch] Scheduling for HTT and not only
lacombar at gmail.com
Tue Apr 10 20:50:40 UTC 2012
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Mike Meyer <mwm at mired.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 12:58:00 -0400
> Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Let me disagree on your conclusion. If OS A does a task in X seconds,
>> and OS B does the same task in Y seconds, if Y > X, then OS B is just
>> not performing good enough.
> Others have pointed out one problem with this statement. Let me point
> out another:
> It ignores the purpose of the system. If you change the task to doing
> N concurrent versions of the task, and OS A time increases linearly
> with the number of tasks (say it's time X*N) but OS B stair-steps at
> the number of processors in the system (i.e. Y*floor(N/P)), then OS A
> is just not performing good enough.
> A more concrete example: if OS B spends a couple of microseconds
> optimizing disk access order and OS A doesn't, then a single process
> writing to disk on OS A could well run faster than the same on OS
> B. However, the maximum throughput on OS B as you add process will be
> higher than it is on OS A. Which one you want will depend on what
> you're using the system for.
You are discussing implementations in both case. If the implementation
is not good enough, let's improve it, but do not discard the numbers
on false claims.
More information about the freebsd-hackers