BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements
BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements
Posted Sep 7, 2009 8:44 UTC (Mon) by dlang (guest, #313)In reply to: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements by kragil
Parent article: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements
most of the computers in use in the world are 8 bit cpu's
most of the new computers sold each year are _still_ 8 bit cpu's (by a smaller margin than in prior years, true, but stil the winner)
so by that argument, both linux and windows are completely irrelevant since neither of them will run on themajority of computers around or being sold.
what Con should have done was to respond that 16 (simulated) cores is too many for the current stage of BFS code, and told Ingo that with X cores it is still solidly in it's sweet spot. Ingo could then go back and run the tests again to see what results he gets.
if with 4 cores his benchmarks still show the machine completely locking up, Con would then need to look at BFS to see why it's so bad for some workloads (which is exactly what he lambastes the kernel scheduler for)
