Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 29 Apr 2007 08:59:01 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v6 |
| |
* Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:
> I don't know if Mike still has problems with SD, but there are now > several interesting reports of SD giving better feedback than CFS on > real work. In my experience, CFS seems smoother on *technical* tests, > which I agree that they do not really simulate real work.
well, there are several reports of CFS being significantly better than SD on a number of workloads - and i know of only two reports where SD was reported to be better than CFS: in Kasper's test (where i'd like to know what the "3D stuff" he uses is and take a good look at that workload), and another 3D report which was done against -v6. (And even in these two reports the 'smoothness advantage' was not dramatic. If you know of any other reports then please let me know!)
Ingo - 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/
| |