I'm not sure that I understand why we need to introduce new code for this kind of functionality. Why not use the FX class and assign your batch processes priority 0 and a longer time quantum? priocntl(1) explains the details about how one might accomplish this.
-j On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 11:57:52PM +0200, Roland Mainz wrote: > > Hi! > > ---- > > Is there anyone interested to help with a small project to add a new > scheduler class for batch jobs, e.g. a "bt" (=batch) scheduler class ? > The idea would be to create something where the process members of this > class are given longer timeslices but can be preempted by any > timeshareing (e.g. TS/IA) class process (as a 2nd phase I'd like to look > at process placement, e.g. put BT class processes on a seperate board or > socket if there are "idle" ones). > > ---- > > Bye, > Roland > > P.S.: Yes, I know about FSS but this is slightly different in this case, > including the detail that (by default) IMO everyone should be allowed to > move processes between "BT" and "TS"/"IA" classes... > > -- > __ . . __ > (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] > \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer > /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 > (;O/ \/ \O;) > _______________________________________________ > perf-discuss mailing list > perf-discuss@opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ perf-discuss mailing list perf-discuss@opensolaris.org
