From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 01:05:12 -0400 From: William Josephson To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] system responsiveness Message-ID: <20020502010512.A60333@honk.eecs.harvard.edu> References: <854ede56869ced0eea759e5201048991@caldo.demon.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <854ede56869ced0eea759e5201048991@caldo.demon.co.uk>; from forsyth@caldo.demon.co.uk on Wed, May 01, 2002 at 08:13:03PM +0100 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 83e3f200-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 On Wed, May 01, 2002 at 08:13:03PM +0100, forsyth@caldo.demon.co.uk wrote: > i've got a full 4th edition network having upgraded > my 3rd edition network at home. as i use it, i keep > thinking it feels somewhat faster than the previous > release, on precisely the same hardware. I don't recall the details, but while I was playing with the scheduler last fall Russ and I found that there was a bug with assigning priorities. Under load the scheduler was a real dog; I think Russ subsequently fixed it. Doing so made the system noticeably snappier. I also ran into some problems with what appeared to be lost clock interrupts, but never had the time to track things down completely. As rob pointed out, the new 9p makes a difference, too.