SMP on FreeBSD 6.x and 7.0: Worth doing? freenx@deweyonline.com

[Claus Guttesen]

> > > It appears, though I'd need to instrument the code more to be sure,
> > > that the slowdown is coming from file I/O. Could it be that there
> > > less concurrency or more overhead in FreeBSD file operations than
> > > there is in Linux? Even with SoftUpdates turned on, the cache
> > > volume mounted with -noatime, and aufs (which uses kqueues -- a
> > > FreeBSD invention -- to optimize multithreaded disk access), the
> > > benchmark shows FreeBSD losing out. Why?
> >
> > I have noticed an entry in GENERIC called
> >
> > device cpufreq
> >
> > Could this have any influence on the performance (on FreeBSD)?
> >
> > I saw this device late in the 7.0 release-process and I since I'm
> > accustomed to comment out any devices and options I don't need I have
> > commented this out as well. So I haven't performed any tests with and
> > without this device.
> >
>
> Cpufreq is for CPU frequency scaling.  In the linux world, the cpufreq
> daemon allows you to control your cpu speed and voltage using power
> profiles and such, which makes it a definite power saving tool for
> laptops.  The cpufreq driver is already included with the Linux kernel,
> so I'm going to assume that they've just implemented the cpufreq driver
> in the kernel recently :)
>
> If enabled, it probably would have an impact on performance, however I
> have lost the ability to test such a function since my laptop decides
> not to POST anymore.

Yes, I did figure out what the purpose of this device was. :-) My
point was that this could lead to lower benchmarks on servers if
GENERIC is used.

-- 
regards
Claus

When lenity and cruelty play for a kingdom,
the gentlest gamester is the soonest winner.

Shakespeare