On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 01:36:43PM -0400, Garance A Drosihn wrote: > At 12:03 AM -0400 4/12/06, Kris Kennaway wrote: > >On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 10:43:32PM +0000, David E. Cross wrote: > >> I saw under http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.1R/todo.html that swap > >> performance under 6.x is slower then 4.X, and this is listed as "not > >> done". > >> > > > I noticed that 6.1 seemed to be a dog, but 6.0 I thought > > > was better. As a test I installed 6.0 and 6.1 in parallel > > > on my laptop with identical ports trees (and packages) > > Note... > > > > and 6.0 does feel a lot more responisve to swapping; I would > > > be eager to help track this down if someone could give me > > > some pointers. If I have to _guess_ as to a problem it would > > > seem like some of the scheduling priorities changed. > > > >I didn't think this was a 6.1 regression compared to 6.0, > >but 6.x compared to 4.x. It would be good to try and > >quantify any performance differences here - so far it's > >just a bunch of people's subjective opinions (including > >mine) after upgrading from 4.x. > > In Dave's case, the tests are explicitly 6.0-release vs > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Those are the two installations he has on > his laptop, which he is comparing to each other via dual- > booting. The thing is, he's not sure how to get the numbers > to back up the performance "feel" that he's experiencing.
Thanks, I did read his email :-) My point was that the problem was not believed to exist in that situation, so it's even more surprising and needs further investigation to be sure. Kris
pgpkjc54voiLb.pgp
Description: PGP signature
