Subject: Re: 4.99.20 sysctl variables...
To: Johnny Billquist <bqt@Update.UU.SE>
From: Bill Stouder-Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/01/2007 19:29:24
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 02:24:33AM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> Bill Stouder-Studenmund wrote:
> >On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 02:00:24PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> >>Hey. Did kern.autonicetime just disappear?
> >I seem to recall a discussion about removing the autonice functionality =
> >the scheduler already penalizes long-running processes. So the sysctl ma=
> >have gone away as a result of it no longer doing anything.
> Yeah, there was a discussion about it. I didn't see a conlusion that it=
> really should disappear.
> And as long as nice do anything, autonice should also do something. So=20
> do you mean we've removed "nice" altogether?
The thought, as I understand it, is that the scheduler already adjusts
scheduling priorities down for long-running processes. So the
functionality that "autonice" is aimed at is already there. Having two
different systems do it is reduntant. It also means that it's very hard to=
actually control it; you have two different systems doing the same thing.
The thread was on tech-kern as I recall. Please see it for details.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----