lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Jan]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: Interesting analysis of linux kernel threading by IBM
    Date
    From
    Peter Rival <frival@zk3.dec.com> said:
    > Mark Hahn wrote:

    [...]

    > Agreed that AIM is not representative directly of what "most" systems do.
    > Maybe a few. But that's one of the reasons that we can play with the
    > workfiles - to better simulate something that might happen in real life.

    "Might happen" just isn't enough for performance tuning. It has to happen,
    and also be frequent enough so it is worthwhile to worry about.

    [...]

    > > without proof that this is an issue, it's not an issue.
    > > seriously, I have a hard time thinking of why a massive DB or webserver
    > > would ever have large numbers of runnable processes (not blocked on IO.)

    > Bad examples. *shrug*

    The _only_ examples given so far are bad examples, as you say. So this
    would mean that this really isn't an issue.
    --
    Dr. Horst H. von Brand mailto:vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl
    Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431
    Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239
    Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513

    -
    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 13:56    [W:0.019 / U:59.372 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site