Re: 7B4 scheduling question

On Sunday 30 December 2007 05:27:15 am Kris Kennaway wrote:
> Yes, ULE is the recommended scheduler.

out of curiosity, if the ULE is becoming the standard, then
why does the 
GENERIC config still have the 4BSD as the default?

im curious to know, since im rebuilding a badly-behaving
7.0-RC1 box that was 
locking up under the loads of building kernel.  (installed
at BETA4, now 
building up to RC1 as i type...)

cheers,
-- 
Jonathan Horne
http://dfwlpiki.dfwlp.org
freebsddfwlp.com
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questionsfreebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-que
stions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-questions-unsubscribefreebsd.org"

Jonathan Horne wrote:
> On Sunday 30 December 2007 05:27:15 am Kris Kennaway
wrote:
>> Yes, ULE is the recommended scheduler.
> 
> out of curiosity, if the ULE is becoming the standard,
then why does the 
> GENERIC config still have the 4BSD as the default?

Release engineers wanted to be conservative in case of
problems.  It 
will change post-release.

> im curious to know, since im rebuilding a
badly-behaving 7.0-RC1 box that was 
> locking up under the loads of building kernel. 
(installed at BETA4, now 
> building up to RC1 as i type...)

Sounds likely to be hardware failure, absent other
evidence.

Kris
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questionsfreebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-que
stions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-questions-unsubscribefreebsd.org"