lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Apr]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: a quest for a better scheduler
Date
From
> for the "normal case" performance see my other message.

I did - and with a lot of interest

> I agree that a better threading model would surely help in a web server, but to
> me this is not an excuse to live up with a broken scheduler.

The problem has always been - alternative scheduler, crappier performance for
2 tasks running (which is most boxes). If your numbers are right then the
HP patch is working as well for 1 or 2 tasks too

> Unless we want to maintain the position tha the only way to achieve good
> performance is to embed server applications in the kernel, some minimal help
> should be provided to goodwilling user applications :)

Indeed. I'd love to see you beat tux entirely in userspace. It proves the
rest of the API for the kernel is right


-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:17    [W:0.041 / U:0.508 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site