DragonFly vs FreeBSD scheduler

O. Hartmann ohartman at zedat.fu-berlin.de
Sat Nov 3 15:29:47 UTC 2012

Am 11/03/12 16:01, schrieb Alfred Perlstein:
> On 11/3/12 6:18 AM, Alie Tan wrote:
>> Hi,
>> No offence, just curious about scheduler and its functionality.
>> What is the different between this two that makes FreeBSD performance far
>> behind DragonFly BSD? http://www.dragonflybsd.org/release32/
> Looks like a few specific benchmarks that DragonFly aimed to do well at
> that we were unawares of.

What is "specific" supposed to mean? It doesn't seem to be very
"specific". This benchmark reflects a general tendency which can also be
observed by the vast of benchmarks "Phoronix" performed.

I guess FreeBSD has been benchmarked with ULE. ULE does have issues and
it's obvious, that ULE performs in specific situations better than the
legacy and old (but after so many years still competetive) BSD scheduler.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/attachments/20121103/914de662/attachment.sig>

More information about the freebsd-current mailing list