From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gentoo-user+bounces-99851-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1Mk4Mu-00022m-0D
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 05 Sep 2009 23:08:28 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CEFC1E07D2;
Sat, 5 Sep 2009 23:08:25 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-fx0-f211.google.com (mail-fx0-f211.google.com [209.85.220.211])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90CE9E07D2
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 5 Sep 2009 23:08:25 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by fxm7 with SMTP id 7so1266090fxm.34
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 05 Sep 2009 16:08:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date
:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding:message-id;
bh=eFoPLGXE0DiFXkqe17NVl+vsr5yj79E0TzNTlHWW928=;
b=kSYm0htY2qb0NiNhfqyu594AsxZzxNnq5jdK/GPaIZhcnW0XZosMkynGNhH1ywkCBi
DHE6Mkcs95XcYsX1Aw3jiiUEgYyce2+JRuHL0ryl23iBnJiuZqKbxAxecifebQn7UzVF
zNGVG5CMIr5kQ/aNGM+6DPmxy+TVwzHaJXHl0=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version
:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id;
b=P+fHZwXQPZmL3DOo29A0RrBa/RocGqNa8Vfa0XteR/3qnqhwYqKY9Z0IJEjpADxiMc
SVvaIkyrL9wdMKET7OVgOrV1frahERcv/OCNWPqGtqMrdqbLWct/wNWonxh3nIAgq0rr
2MSBNWwIEbyB/Zl7Tb4nsxf9NzKD/SwXFrGR8=
Received: by 10.86.231.15 with SMTP id d15mr6438503fgh.74.1252192105025;
Sat, 05 Sep 2009 16:08:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nazgul.localnet (196-210-140-68-rrdg-esr-2.dynamic.isadsl.co.za [196.210.140.68])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d4sm5164761fga.23.2009.09.05.16.08.24
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5);
Sat, 05 Sep 2009 16:08:24 -0700 (PDT)
From: Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Kon Colivas is working again on a new scheduler for Desktop/Multimedia/Gaming PCs
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2009 01:06:52 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.12.1 (Linux/2.6.30-gentoo-r6; KDE/4.3.1; x86_64; ; )
References: <h7s898$hup$1@ger.gmane.org> <h7ufs9$eal$1@ger.gmane.org> <200909060048.40378.volkerarmin@googlemail.com>
In-Reply-To: <200909060048.40378.volkerarmin@googlemail.com>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <200909060106.52526.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>
X-Archives-Salt: 769a9a40-6568-44a8-b389-f8d36a5ed7c8
X-Archives-Hash: b267ed7ca1b57828b1773e23b907dd55
On Sunday 06 September 2009 00:48:40 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > Also, have you considered that you got it all backwards? The kernel
> > configuration tells you that for lower latencies, you should use 1000Hz
> > and PREEMPT. It even says "Desktop" right there. Why should I take
> > your word over that of the kernel devs who actually wrote that code?
>
> low latency means bad throughput and that hurts IO.
The average desktop user on Linux needs low latency. To get that, one must
sacrifice some throughput efficiency.
The average server machine needs high throughput. To get that, one must
sacrifice some latency efficiency.
Latency and throughput cannot both be optimal as they conflict. One must pick
the point of the line on the graph that best suits one's needs and move
forward from there. I have no idea what hardware you run but your replies
indicate a high possibility of one of these:
1. server usage
2. Massive bleeding edge desktop hardware that can give acceptable performance
regardless of what you throw at it.
have you considered that there is a large population of users whose needs and
workload are totally different from yours and therefore require something
completely different to you?
--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com