Re: SCHED_ULE and nice still ignored

From: Steve Kargl (sgk_at_troutmask.apl.washington.edu)
Date: 01/31/04

  • Next message: Harald Schmalzbauer: "Re: SCHED_ULE and nice still ignored" 
    Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 13:24:19 -0800
To: Harald Schmalzbauer <h@schmalzbauer.de>

    On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 09:46:29PM +0100, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote:
    Content-Description: signed data
    >
    > like I reported some weeks ago, SCHED_ULE seems to ignore nice.
    > Since it's now the default I gave it another try and did the following simple
    > test:
    >
    > SCHED_ULE:
    > seti in background (doesn't matter if nice=20 or 15)
    > /usr/ports/sysutils/cpdup
    > make install takes Minutes
    >
    > Without seti it takes some seconds
    >
    > SCHED_4BSD:
    > seti in background (doesn't matter if nice=20 or 15)
    > /usr/ports/sysutils/cpdup
    > make install finishes in seconds. No difference with or without seti
    >
    >
    > Please let us know when nice gets respected by SCHED_ULE so I can really use
    > it as default scheduler.
    >

    Seems to work for me. You need to describe your problem better.

    last pid: 70890; load averages: 2.49, 1.86, 1.54 up 1+17:55:17 13:23:16
    64 processes: 5 running, 59 sleeping
    CPU states: 16.8% user, 4.6% nice, 77.7% system, 1.0% interrupt, 0.0% idle
    Mem: 120M Active, 176M Inact, 58M Wired, 18M Cache, 48M Buf, 1072K Free
    Swap: 356M Total, 356M Free

      PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE TIME WCPU CPU COMMAND
      592 kargl 76 0 35248K 34284K RUN 600:36 1.56% 1.56% XFree86
    70093 kargl 8 20 1708K 1000K wait 0:00 1.56% 1.56% sh
    70889 kargl 139 20 4152K 3148K RUN 0:00 1.56% 1.56% cc1
    70887 kargl 8 20 328K 220K wait 0:00 1.56% 1.56% gcc
    70886 kargl 8 20 1708K 1000K wait 0:00 1.56% 1.56% sh
      822 kargl 76 0 5000K 3276K select 2:02 0.78% 0.78% xterm
    70792 root 8 0 1336K 1216K wait 0:00 0.78% 0.78% make
    70888 root 8 0 1660K 944K wait 0:00 0.78% 0.78% sh
    70890 root 139 0 1568K 632K RUN 0:00 0.78% 0.78% gzip
      606 kargl 76 0 5068K 3340K RUN 0:01 0.00% 0.00% xterm
    70765 kargl 76 0 2312K 1364K RUN 0:00 0.00% 0.00% top 

    -- 
Steve
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
  • Next message: Harald Schmalzbauer: "Re: SCHED_ULE and nice still ignored"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Cant open hosts file on xp!
      ... Yes still a SETI phan... ... years processing WUs ... As for the upgrade from one OS to WinXP, it is always best to do a clean install with *any* ...
      (alt.computer.security)
    • Re: Seti and XP Pro
      ... I have had no problem running Seti with XP Pro for the last 6 weeks since ... run with other similar shared computing programs such as United Devices UD ... > new install of XP pro on a new PC and the same programmes installed as on ...
      (microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support)
    • Re: SCHED_ULE and nice still ignored
      ... >> make install finishes in seconds. ... No difference with or without seti ... It should take cycles which are almost unused and not block regular processes ... If you want to know exact values, I can take a clock and measure the exact ...
      (freebsd-current)
    • SCHED_ULE and nice still ignored
      ... seti in background (doesn't matter if nice=20 or 15) ... Without seti it takes some seconds ... make install finishes in seconds. ... it as default scheduler. ...
      (freebsd-current)