Messages in this thread | | | From | Martin Knoblauch <> | Subject | Re: Benchmarks for performance patches (-ck) for 2.4.19 | Date | Mon, 2 Sep 2002 14:50:53 +0200 |
| |
>> I mean, besides making the kernel with as low latency as possible, what >> is bad about the responsiveness in the kernel? If there's any lag in >> responsiveness that i see it's always something X related, particularly >> Xfree86. > > >"low latency" != responsiveness > > >Any latency which is below the point the user can notice >is effectively zero, so whether the 10000 wakeups/minute >that the user doesn't notice are 2ms or 5ms don't really >matter.
absolugtely correct. My main grief wrt. responsiveness of desktop systems is when the VM decides to grow the cache at the cost of pushing parts of KDE into swap. As a result, "activating" windows that I haven't touched for some time takes noticeable delays, which ruins the interactiveness.
My best setup for this is to have lots of memory and disable swap (and live with the consequences- eg. triggering the OOM killer).
Admittedly, things seem to be much better now than six month ago.
Martin -- Martin Knoblauch Senior System Architect MSC.software GmbH Am Moosfeld 13 D-81829 Muenchen, Germany
e-mail: martin.knoblauch@mscsoftware.com http://www.mscsoftware.com Phone/Fax: +49-89-431987-189 / -7189 Mobile: +49-174-3069245
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |