Mike Jakubik wrote:
On 2012-10-12 05:21 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
On 12 October 2012 11:10, Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> wrote:
I don't like comparing Release Candidates without any details about
config,
but the fact that DF 3.2 is much better than DF 3.0 is interesting.
And they
are very close to performance of Scientific Linux 6.2.
Hey cool! And FreeBSD-9.1 is on there and doing worse than Linux and
Dragonfly BSD. I wonder why that is.
Lemme cross post this a little to see what people think.
http://lists.dragonflybsd.org/pipermail/users/2012-October/017536.html
Graphs are available as PDF attachments
http://lists.dragonflybsd.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20121010/7996ff88/attachment-0002.pdf
http://lists.dragonflybsd.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20121010/7996ff88/attachment-0003.pdf
These numbers show very significant improvements. Any
possibility/interests in porting this scheduler to FreeBSD or this too
much work? I know many have and still complain about our current scheduler.
Just for the record. There is Phoronix benchmark comparing DF 3.0.3,
3.2.1 and Ubuntu 12.10 showing that scheduler tweaks was good for
pgbench, but not so significant for other tasks.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=dragonfly_linux_32
Miroslav Lachman
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
