We compare the performance of a large suite of applications on the modified kernel running ULE and on the standard Linux kernel running CFS. We have ported ULE to Linux, and use it to schedule all threads that are normally scheduled by CFS. We compare ULE and CFS in otherwise identical circumstances. This paper analyzes the impact on application performance of the design and implementation choices made in two widely used open-source schedulers: ULE, the default FreeBSD scheduler, and CFS, the default Linux scheduler. Headlines Battle of the Schedulers: FreeBSD ULE vs. Send us these words in order to with the subject “bsdnow256” until August 8th, 2018 18:00 UTC and we’ll randomly draw the winner on the live show. They spell different words in each of the 4 episodes. In the opening, find the 4 letters in the bookshelf behind me. To enter, go find the 4 episodes we did in December of 2017. You can win a Mogics Power Bagel (not sponsored). Linux CFS, OpenBSD on Tuxedo InfinityBook, how zfs diff reports filenames efficiently, why choose FreeBSD over Linux, PS4 double free exploit, OpenBSD’s wifi autojoin, and FreeBSD jails the hard way.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |