Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Interactivity improvements | From | Felipe Alfaro Solana <> | Date | Thu, 07 Aug 2003 17:31:17 +0200 |
| |
On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 16:26, Patrick McLean wrote:
> Finally, the interactivity estimator seems to be quite a bit of code, > which certain people have no real useful (in servers for example) and I > would imagine that it does reduce throughput, which is not a big deal in > desktops, but in a server environment it's not good, so maybe a > CONFIG_INTERACTIVE_ESTIMATOR or something similar would be an idea to > keep the server people happy, just have an option to completely get rid > of the extra overhead of having a really nice interactivity estimator. I > could be an idiot though, and I imagine that I will be needing some > asbestos for saying this, but I thought I would voice my opinion.
In the past, I proposed to have at least 2 schedulers available (much like we have for I/O schedulers): one for servers, which doesn't mess with bonuses and interactivity too much and gives best throughput for batch processing (OLTP and in general, non-interactive loads), and another one for desktops or Terminal Servers.
Don't know if this is feasible, however.
- 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/
| |