[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 15:22:15 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc: "Ma, Chinang" <chinang.ma@...el.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Wilcox, Matthew R" <matthew.r.wilcox@...el.com>,
"Van De Ven, Arjan" <arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com>,
"Styner, Douglas W" <douglas.w.styner@...el.com>,
"Chilukuri, Harita" <harita.chilukuri@...el.com>,
"Wang, Peter Xihong" <peter.xihong.wang@...el.com>,
"Nueckel, Hubert" <hubert.nueckel@...el.com>
Subject: Re: CFS scheduler OLTP perforamnce
On Fri, 2008-12-12 at 15:15 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> writes:
> >>
> >> It seems that in this case renice to higher priority with CFS did not
> >> reduce scheduling latency as well as SCHED_RR.
> >
> > Is there a question in this email?
>
> The question is how to make nice perform as well as SCHED_RR.
Depending on the circumstances, you can't - SCHED_RR doesn't bother with
fairness.
That is not to say there is no room for improvement, but that really
needs more information.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists