Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 3 Apr 2001 21:14:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 3 Apr 2001 21:14:40 -0400 Received: from chromium11.wia.com ([207.66.214.139]:32005 "EHLO neptune.kirkland.local") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 3 Apr 2001 21:14:36 -0400 Message-ID: <3ACA7629.E8C54D13@chromium.com> Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 18:17:30 -0700 From: Fabio Riccardi X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.2 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan Cox CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: a quest for a better scheduler In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alan Cox wrote: > > for the "normal case" performance see my other message. > > I did - and with a lot of interest thanks! :) > > I agree that a better threading model would surely help in a web server, but to > > me this is not an excuse to live up with a broken scheduler. > > The problem has always been - alternative scheduler, crappier performance for > 2 tasks running (which is most boxes). If your numbers are right then the > HP patch is working as well for 1 or 2 tasks too Please verify them if you have a couple of spare hours. BTW: I measured similar results for the "scalability" patches on a 2.4.1 kernel, it would be worth the effort to seriously compare them from an architectural point of view, but I don't have the time right now... > > Unless we want to maintain the position tha the only way to achieve good > > performance is to embed server applications in the kernel, some minimal help > > should be provided to goodwilling user applications :) > > Indeed. I'd love to see you beat tux entirely in userspace. It proves the > rest of the API for the kernel is right Indeed, I'm using RT sigio/sigwait event scheduling, bare clone threads and zero-copy io. If only I had a really asynchronous sendfile, or a smarter madvise that wouldn't require to map files :) My server cannot execute dynamic stuff yet, it relies on Apache for that. Running X15 and TUX in the same conditions (i.e. dynamic code in Apache) I get exactly the same score in both cases. I'm adding a TUX-like dynamic interface, I hope to get it to work by next week, then I'll make a real confrontation. Regards, ciao, - Fabio - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/