| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurementsBFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurementsPosted Sep 7, 2009 6:53 UTC (Mon) by bvdm (guest, #42755)In reply to: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements by MattPerry Parent article: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements
Did Ingo claim that he was testing BFS against the mainline scheduler for BFS's intended use cases? No.
"I'd guess that a machine with more than 16 CPUS would start to have less performance."
Even if you consider hyper-threading to result in 16 cores (which is not the case at all), in his FAQ Con claims that BFS should perform well up to 16 cores.
I realize how people can be very passionate about Linux and how the scheduler as something that critically affects user experience becomes important, but is all this emotion really necessary?
(Log in to post comments)
|
|
||||||||||||