Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 1 Feb 2000 19:16:28 -0500 | From | Tim Magill <> | Subject | Re: On optimising the scheduler for large run queues |
| |
On Mon, Jan 31, 2000 at 10:46:23PM -0300, Horst von Brand wrote: > Marco Colombo <marco@esi.it> said: > > [...] > > > In other words, I won't call an application that has both high > > switch rate and causes a long RQ "well designed, well tuned". > > I can hardly think of such an application which has a good cache > > behaviour at the same time (that's my impression). > > > > So I think that an application that has both high switch rate and > > long RQ is NOT "well designed, well tuned", and you should optimize it. > > This might be a legacy application that isn't worth the massive work of > rewriting, so tune & optimize is out. Question then becomes: How common > and/or important is this kind of stuff?
Would non-trivial process pipelines create fairly fast switch rates and possibly deep RQ's? It seems to me that one of the early ANSI C compilers was a 6 stage compiler implementing each phase of compilation in a separate binary. Pipeline the stages and you have six process running. Obviously this compiler was less optimal than a 2 pass compiler, but it would have been easy to debug.
tim
- 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/
| |