John Nagle wrote: > C gets to > run briefly, drains out the pipe, and blocks. P gets to run, > fills the pipe, and blocks. The compute-bound thread gets to run, > runs for a full time quantum, and loses the CPU to C. Wash, > rinse, repeat.
I thought that unix schedulers were usually a bit more intelligent than that, and would dynamically lower the priority of processes using CPU heavily. If it worked purely as you describe, then a CPU-bound process would make any interactive application running at the same time very unresponsive. That doesn't seem to happen on any of today's desktop unix systems. -- Greg -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
