FreeBSD 6.2: ULE vs 4BSD

[RW]

On Sunday 26 November 2006 19:43, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 26, 2006 at 05:06:57PM +0000, RW wrote:
> > On Sunday 26 November 2006 12:18, Andrew Pantyukhin wrote:
> > > On 11/26/06, John Smith <almarrie at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > What shall I use as a scheduler on it? 4BSD or ULE?
> > >
> > > The general consensus is you should not touch ULE unless
> > > you're a developer willing to fix some outstanding issues and
> > > maybe take active maintainership of it.
> >
> > I think that's a bit strong. I've used both, off and on, on my Desktop
> > machine and not seen any real difference.
>
> Guess you're one of the lucky ones then.  I hope you can understand
> why in general users should not use a kernel feature with known
> problems, and they should at the very least turn it off and reconfirm
> their problems before reporting them, to avoid wasting developer time.

It might save everyone a lot of time if the GENERIC file entry were changed 
to:

#options      SCHED_ULE        # ULE scheduler (experimental)