[lkml]   [2006]   [Mar]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Which kernel is the best for a small linux system?

    * Willy Tarreau <> wrote:

    > scheduler is still a big problem. Not only we occasionally see people
    > complaining about unfair CPU distribution across processes (may be
    > fixed now), but the scheduler still gives a huge boost to I/O
    > intensive tasks which do lots of select() with small time-outs, which
    > makes it practically unusable in network-intensive environments. I've
    > observed systems on which it was nearly impossible to log in via SSH
    > because of this, and I could reproduce the problem locally to create a
    > local DoS where a single user could prevent anybody from logging in.
    > 2.6.15 has improved a lot on this (pauses have reduced from 35 seconds
    > to 4 seconds) but it's still not very good.

    i think we've talked about your specific case before, and lets not drop
    it on the floor. IIRC you have some special workload (driven by serial
    lines?) which behaves interactively and which thus gets too much

    the passive methods: did you try to mute its impact by renicing it to +5
    or +10? If you know that a workload is not interactive, despite it
    behaving so, you can always prevent it from getting too much attention.
    There's also SCHED_BATCH in 2.6.16-ish kernels.

    and there are some active methods as well: you might want to try Mike
    Galbraith's scheduler throttling feature:

    (which we could try in -mm too perhaps, perhaps Mike has an updated
    patch for 2.6.16-rc6-mm1?)

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-03-14 08:34    [from the cache]
    ©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean