Re: some more nifty benchmarks

[Lincoln Dale]

At 10:37 PM 5/04/2002 +0200, Dieter Nützel wrote:
>That's not true with the O(1)-scheduler.
>In most of my tests (Ingo got my results) you have to renice the audio daemon
>to something like -16 (first "real time" class) and X to -10 (for good
>interactivity) during "heavy" background stuff (40 gcc and 40 g++ processes
>reniced +19 for example). This load resulting in ~350 processes, 80~85
>running in parallel and sound playing on my "old" 1 GHz Athlon II with 640
>MB...;-)

you've completely missed the point.

for "CPU intensive" tasks (which GCC will be for large files being 
compiled), it will want to use its entire time-slice.
with HZ set at 100 for x86, that means it can run for up to 10msec without 
being preempted (if its not performing any system calls, I/O or other 
things which can cause a context-switch).

with 40 of these running, i have no doubt that you'll get skips on your audio.

are you using xmms?  if so, this has been discussed to death previously - 
and the fault lies with the userspace application.

cheers,

lincoln.