Re: [PATCH] O12.2int for interactivity

[Rob Landley]

On Tuesday 05 August 2003 18:49, Timothy Miller wrote:

> Or closer to the point:
>
> "For each record player, there is a record which it cannot play."
> For more detail, please read this dialog:
> http://www.geocities.com/g0del_escher_bach/dialogue4.html
...
> The interactivity detection algorithm will always be inherently
> imperfect.  Given that it is not psychic, it cannot tell in advance
> whether or not a given process is supposed to be interactive, so it must
> GUESS based on its behavior.

Another way of looking at it is that every time you remove a bottleneck, the 
next most serious problem becomes the new bottleneck.

Does this mean it's a bad idea to stop trying to identify the next bottleneck?  
(Whether or not you then choose to deal with it is another question...)

Rob

-
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/