On Tue, 21 Apr 2009, Hannah Schroeter wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 07:07:13AM -0400, RD Thrush wrote:
"a" == Ariane van der Steldt writes:
a> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 01:57:55PM -0400, RD Thrush wrote:
[...]
The problem can be reproduced by busying each core w/ a 'nice'd
process. Then,
Hi!
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 07:07:13AM -0400, RD Thrush wrote:
>> "a" == Ariane van der Steldt writes:
>a> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 01:57:55PM -0400, RD Thrush wrote:
>>> I've recently noticed reduced performance when building ports for
>>> amd64 and i386 platforms on multiprocessor boxes. I
> "a" == Ariane van der Steldt writes:
a> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 01:57:55PM -0400, RD Thrush wrote:
>> I've recently noticed reduced performance when building ports for
>> amd64 and i386 platforms on multiprocessor boxes. I found the problem
>> was associated with running a 'nice'd dnetc [1]
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 01:57:55PM -0400, RD Thrush wrote:
> I've recently noticed reduced performance when building ports for
> amd64 and i386 platforms on multiprocessor boxes. I found the problem
> was associated with running a 'nice'd dnetc [1] process on each
> processor. Without the 'nice'd
4 matches
Mail list logo
