SCHED_ULE should not be the default
killing at multiplay.co.uk
Thu Dec 15 14:19:48 UTC 2011
With all the discussion I thought I'd give a buildworld
benchmark a go here on a spare 24 core machine. ULE
tested fine but with 4BSD it wont even boot panicing
with the following:-
This is on a clean 8.2-RELEASE-p4
Upgrading to RELENG_9 fixed this but its a bit concerning
that just changing the scheduler would cause the machine
to panic on boot.
Its only a single run so varience could be high but here's
the result of a buildworld on this machine running the
two different schedulers:-
4BSD: 24m54.10s real 2h43m12.42s user 56m20.07s sys
ULE: 23m54.68s real 2h34m59.04s user 50m59.91s sys
What really sticks out is that this is over double that
of an 8.2 buildworld on the same machine with the same
ULE: 11m12.76s real 1h27m59.39s user 28m59.57s sys
This was run 9.0-PRERELEASE kernel due to 4BSD panicing
on boot under 8.2.
So for this use ULE vs 4BSD is neither here-nor-there
but 9.0 buildworld is very slow (x2 slower) compared
with 8.2 so whats a bigger question in my mind.
This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it.
In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone +44 845 868 1337
or return the E.mail to postmaster at multiplay.co.uk.
More information about the freebsd-stable