Messages in this thread | | | From | "Khimenko Victor" <> | Date | Thu, 20 Jan 2000 18:14:22 +0300 (MSK) | Subject | Re: Interesting analysis of linux kernel threading by IBM |
| |
In <022201bf62b0$81cee7d0$1f0104c0@maticad> Davide Libenzi (davidel@maticad.it) wrote: > Wednesday, January 19, 2000 10:25 PM > David Lang <dlang@diginsite.com> wrote : >> This has probably been asked before, but how difficult would it be to have >> two different schedulers available as compile time options? that way they >> system could be optimized for the expected load.
> Hi David,
> my patch has great performance ( 80% with 300 tasks ) with a lot of tasks > and low overhead ( 1.5% with 2 tasks ). > And my patch has 0.00 optimizations about CPU fetches and Co. > IMVHO 1-1.5 % of overhead is a price the we can afford given the performace > with many tasks. > My patch equals the current implementation with 8 tasks.
Even 8 tasks is unusual for Desktop. Usually there are 2-3 active tasks. On other hand Desktop usually is idle all the time anyway so 1.5% looks affordable for sure. And for server with LOTS of active processes (Apache, *SQL, etc) it can be real win.
Where I can find your patch ?
- 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/
| |