Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v6

[Ingo Molnar]

* Willy Tarreau <w@xxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/