On Nov 22, 2010, at 1:16 PM, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> Richard L. Hamilton wrote:
>> I think libXt uses select();
>
> Yes.
>
>> one could imagine an alternate implementation
>> that used event ports and a high-resolution timer. It might take
>> a lot of testing to get right though, and high r
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/22/2010 7:01 AM, John Martin wrote:
> On 11/22/10 12:25 AM, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>
>> I believe Linux defaults to a higher resolution timer, something
>> you can
>> enable system-wide on Solaris, ...
>
> Just as an experiment to verify, in
Richard L. Hamilton wrote:
> I think libXt uses select();
Yes.
> one could imagine an alternate implementation
> that used event ports and a high-resolution timer. It might take
> a lot of testing to get right though, and high resolution timers require
> the user to have an additional fine-grai
> Hi
> We cant use QT or GNOME here as we are using Xorgs
> ...
>
> Is there any way you can suggest to verify to check
> the performance impact .
Run some tests (vmstat, enable sar data collection and let it run for awhile))
booted both with and without the hires_tick setting, and see what hap
I mean we are not in position to deploy a QT framework into the production
machine only for these purpose .
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Debabrata Debroy wrote:
> Hi
>We cant use QT or GNOME here as we are using Xorgs ...
That makes no sense. Qt & GNOME are both written to work with a
variety of X servers, but generally work best on/target Xorg.
--
-Alan Coopersmith-alan.coopersm...@oracle.com
Oracl
Hi
We cant use QT or GNOME here as we are using Xorgs ...
Is there any way you can suggest to verify to check the performance impact .
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.o
Obviously it will have some performance impact.
Whether you'll notice it is another story. I found a
posts about the impact:
http://blogs.sun.com/jtc/entry/overhead_in_increasing_the_solaris
but nothing would be anywhere near as informative as testing with
your actual workload.
I think libXt u
On 11/22/10 07:13 AM, Debabrata Debroy wrote:
Hi John it is working fine with the changes .Can you please tell what
will be the performance impact of this
The system clock tick rate gets bumped from 100Hz (10mS) to
1000Hz (1mS), so the system load handling the clock interrupt
will go up. Objec
Hi John it is working fine with the changes .Can you please tell what will
be the performance impact of this
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 5:31 PM, John Martin wrote:
> On 11/22/10 12:25 AM, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>
> I believe Linux defaults to a higher resolution timer, something you can
>> enable
I have changed the setting by enabling set hires_tick=1 and it was working
fine.Fun was getting called even within 1 milli second.
Can you please suggest whether it will have any performance impact or not .
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
On 11/22/10 12:25 AM, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
I believe Linux defaults to a higher resolution timer, something you can
enable system-wide on Solaris, ...
Just as an experiment to verify, in /etc/system add:
set hires_tick = 1
and reboot.
___
open
Debabrata Debroy wrote:
> I have written Following program so that fun() gets called by every 10 mili
> seconds.But after executing the program I Found its calling the function
> after 20 mili seconds.If I specify timeinterval as 20 mili second in
> XtAppAddTimeOut function its calling fun met
Hi All
I have written Following program so that fun() gets called by every 10 mili
seconds.But after executing the program I Found its calling the function after
20 mili seconds.If I specify timeinterval as 20 mili second in XtAppAddTimeOut
function its calling fun method after 30 mili seconds
14 matches
Mail list logo
