On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 04:17:28AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote: | Jonathon McKitrick wrote: | > A couple of months ago, I saw a note on daemonnews that there was a | > patch for a proportional share scheduler. When would this work better | > than the existing priority feedback scheduler? | > | > NOTE: Please CC me, as I am not currently subscribed. Thanks. | | Basically, you use it if you expect the system to be overloaded, | and don't want to spend the engineering effort to prevent/handle | the overload, and astill want the system to degrade gracefully.
Ah, I see. | thrashing, but the result was that the X server had sufficiently | good interactive response to fullfill the "move mouse -> wiggle | cursor" requirement amd avoid cognitive dissonance on the part | of the user attached to the mouse. 8-). Why don't they just add an extra CPU to handle the GUI?? ;-) | Here is an introduction from a moderately good paper on the subject. Interesting how these 'fundamental' concepts of CS are still being researched/refined over the years. Unix already applies so much research and development that was found to have real-world practicality, and yet still there is room for improvement in at least some circumstances. I'll check out these papers you referred to. | For my money, the algorithm to use in networking equipment, in | which you want to optimize packet throughput, is Weighted Fair | Share Queueing (as in the IBM/UMass work on QLinux, which also It would be nice if the 'instant workstation' port tweaked the system settings to meet a balance between needs of the network and needs of the user. Things like scheduler, sysctl settings, and so on. Of course, that's a bit of overkill, wouldn't ya say? ;-) jm -- My other computer is your Windows box. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
