lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Aug]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: Prioritized I/O
Date
>>>>> "Richard" == Richard Gooch <rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca> writes:
> Exactly! I know it can seem "nice" that a FS could prioritise access,
> but is it really worth the drama? Dedicating a disc to a high priority
> task seems much simpler and robust.

I personally couldn't care less about true real-time behavior, but
there is something to be said for some kind of I/O (and memory) priority (set
dynamically) in order to prevent a thrashing monster from making the machine
unuseable.
Problem is, I can't seem to find the cool algorithm that would automatically
notice such a situation and would correctly reduce the resident-set-size and
I/O use of such a monster (or alternatively that would automatically notice
which processes should be provided with a "guaranteed" amount of ram and I/O).


Stefan

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:53    [W:0.026 / U:0.128 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site