Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.hawaii.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.mathworks.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!nntp.coast.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!awfulhak.demon.co.uk!awfulhak.demon.co.uk!awfulhak.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail From: brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk (Brian Somers) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: dual processors Date: 19 Jul 1996 11:57:35 +0100 Organization: Coverform Ltd. Lines: 14 Message-ID: <4snpmv$9o@anorak.coverform.lan> References: <31C67EA0.9E0C259@unix.sri.com> <Pine.ULT.3.91.960705140128.3415E-100000@blaze.trentu.ca> <31DD7D6D.5A46CCCD@lambert.org> <4s3ok2$go3@news.abs.net> <31E5CE8D.4CDCA958@lambert.org> <4sgh8u$lc@anorak.coverform.lan> <31ED9E98.61FB29C1@lambert.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.coverform.lan X-NNTP-Posting-Host: awfulhak.demon.co.uk X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] Terry Lambert (terry@lambert.org) wrote: [.....] : Historically, kernel preemption added a 160% performance : improvement on UFS in UnixWare 2.x in the UP case, even after lock : overhead was subtracted out. [.....] Looks to me like UnixWare could have done with a few strategically placed swtch() calls before the preemption was put in. I would think that FreeBSD wouldn't gain even close to 160%. -- Brian <brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk> Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour....