Re: A nice CPU resource controller

[Mike Galbraith]

On Thu, 2006-08-31 at 15:21 +1000, Peter Williams wrote:
> Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-08-31 at 11:07 +1000, Peter Williams wrote:
> > 
> >> But your implication here is valid.  It is better to fiddle with the 
> >> dynamic priorities than with nice as this leaves nice for its primary 
> >> purpose of enabling the sysadmin to effect the allocation of CPU 
> >> resources based on external considerations.
> > 
> > I don't understand.  It _is_ the administrator fiddling with nice based
> > on external considerations.  It just steadies the administrator's hand.
> 
> Not exactly.  If "nice" is being (automatically) fiddled to meet some 
> measurable requirement such as the amount of CPU tasks get it is no 
> longer available as a means for the indication of the relative 
> importance of the tasks.

Yeah, I thought about that meanwhile, see other reply.

	-Mike

-
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/