From: EBo <ebo@sandien.com>
To: <gentoo-soc@lists.gentoo.org>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-soc] (draft) final report for OpenRC soc project 2012
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 12:15:11 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <853de4b0ebf8a229a4882e623d370eea@mail.swcp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86haryqn5x.fsf@gmail.com>
On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 12:04:26 +0900, heroxbd@gmail.com wrote:
> Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> writes:
>
>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 3:29 AM, Luca Barbato <lu_zero@gentoo.org>
>> wrote:
>>> It can be not so tiny, surely busybox+openrc gives a better gain in
>>> many
>>> cases.
>>>
>>
>> I suspect that it will depend greatly on what services you're
>> running,
>> and what order they happen to start in, and what you care about. In
>> theory slamming the kernel with a ton of processes will allow it to
>> manage its queues better with a fuller understanding of demand.
>> systemd can potentially short-cut this a bit further since it can
>> consider a dependency resolved if nothing more than a socket is
>> created, which is a clever trick (I have no idea how well it works
>> out
>> in practice, though I have used a .socket service once and that
>> worked
>> out fine (with the caveat that the first connection fails)).
>
> Yeah, this is a brilliant idea.
just as a side note, when I was doing performance latency testing (for
industrial robotics applications) on real-time Linux kernels (RTAI, soft
real-time preempt, and hard real-time preempt) I noticed that I got
better latencies when when I loaded up the system with a LOT of
processes and workload. If you end up looking into the RT stuff, let me
know off list and maybe I can send a link or six.
EBo --
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-20 18:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-24 8:58 [gentoo-soc] report 7.16-7.23: improving OpenRC heroxbd
2012-08-07 4:53 ` [gentoo-soc] report 7.24-8.7: " heroxbd
2012-08-07 9:16 ` Luca Barbato
2012-08-08 23:24 ` [gentoo-soc] report 8.8: " heroxbd
2012-08-09 6:05 ` Luca Barbato
2012-08-10 2:56 ` [gentoo-soc] report 8.9: " heroxbd
2012-08-10 8:51 ` Luca Barbato
2012-08-11 0:31 ` [gentoo-soc] report 8.10: " heroxbd
2012-08-11 23:50 ` [gentoo-soc] report 8.11: " heroxbd
2012-08-13 8:33 ` Luca Barbato
2012-08-15 15:14 ` [gentoo-soc] (draft) final report for OpenRC soc project 2012 heroxbd
2012-08-15 21:47 ` Luca Barbato
2012-08-16 8:38 ` heroxbd
2012-08-16 11:41 ` Rich Freeman
2012-08-17 5:39 ` heroxbd
2012-08-17 7:29 ` Luca Barbato
2012-08-17 11:56 ` Rich Freeman
2012-08-20 3:04 ` heroxbd
2012-08-20 8:16 ` Luca Barbato
2012-08-20 10:25 ` Fabian Groffen
2012-08-20 16:32 ` Luca Barbato
2012-08-20 18:25 ` Fabian Groffen
2012-08-20 10:47 ` Rich Freeman
2012-08-20 16:34 ` Luca Barbato
2012-08-20 18:12 ` Rich Freeman
2012-08-20 18:28 ` Luca Barbato
2012-08-20 16:15 ` EBo [this message]
2012-08-21 14:07 ` heroxbd
2012-08-21 15:55 ` Luca Barbato
2012-08-22 2:04 ` heroxbd
2012-08-22 7:35 ` Luca Barbato
2012-08-27 10:46 ` Patrick Lauer
2012-08-27 12:37 ` Rich Freeman
2012-08-27 13:29 ` Luca Barbato
2012-08-27 14:10 ` Rich Freeman
2012-08-27 14:35 ` Luca Barbato
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=853de4b0ebf8a229a4882e623d370eea@mail.swcp.com \
--to=ebo@sandien.com \
--cc=gentoo-soc@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox