Situation resolved. Turns out there was one small line in a kernel config file that we overlooked. Seems the apm device was causing a massive performance penalty. We don't really need it so we removed it. All performance metrics are now exactly where they should be.
-- Milo Hyson Chief "Mad" Scientist CyberLife Labs, LLC On Sat, 2004-01-31 at 18:00, Milo Hyson wrote: > We don't have any other systems that are as similar as the two in the > test, however we did plot context-switching performance against CPU and > memory performance on several systems to see if anything jumped out. We > found that beastie (the 2200+) is doing only about 26% of the > task-switches/dhrystone that the other systems were, which were all > pretty much about equal with each other. This is consistent with the > observation that appserver (the 2100+) is four-times as fast. I think we > can probably conclude that beastie is running slower than it should. > > So the question still remains. What could affect context-switching to > this degree yet not show up in other benchmarks? _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
