> > Sometime ago, I made down a combo patch and, sincerely, it's the one I'm
> > using the most for my desktop boxes as it's the one that gets better
> > response times and interactive feeling. For my server boxes, neither my
> > combo patch, neither Con or stock do feel good when the system is under
> > heavy load. It suffers from starvation. Simply doing a "tar jxvf" makes
> > logging into the system a PITA.
> And this one is almost certainly not a process scheduler issue, but an IO
> scheduler one. 2.5.75 may help that a bit - anticipatory IO scheduling
> from the -mm tree, and a much simpler (and in my tests, noticeably faster
> and more robust) executable mmap prefetcher.
> But as with process scheduling, I don't believe in "perfect". It will just
> have to be "good enough for a lot of people".
Indeed. Yesterday while I was doing the SOFTRR hack I had after a quite
long time the opportunity to test the current scheduler interactivity. To
me it looks very good. My usual `make -j 40 bzImage` let my system
completely usable. If all this noise was for the tar thingy maybe we are
responsible to not have well read the thread to stop it soon.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/