Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44

[Geert Bosch]

On Apr 21, 2007, at 12:18, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Also, I believe that (in shells), most forked processes do not even  
> consume
> a full timeslice (eg: $(uname -n) is very fast). This means that  
> assigning
> them with a shorter one will not hurt them while preserving the  
> shell's
> performance against CPU hogs.

On a fast machine, during regression testing of GCC, I've noticed we  
create
an average of 500 processes per second during an hour or so. There  
are other
work loads like this. So, most processes start, execute and complete  
in 2ms.
How does fairness work in a situation like this?

  -Geert
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/