Re: 2.4 O(1) scheduler

[Austin Gonyou <austin@digitalroadkill.net>]

Been using 2.4.19-rc1-aa2 on a fairly large x86 box for about 16 days
now. Nothing but love. Using the 0/1 scheduler, though I'm not sure if I
could tweak it for "better" performance.(hint: like to see some
"best-practices" type of doc, for 4/8-way SMP boxen)

Aside from that, I've got 8GB ram, a ~750GB Oracle instance running, and
4GB SHMMAX attatched to some Copper FC1 disks and using QLA2200's. 

It's been very happy since rc1. Anyway, it's worth a shot. As soon as
2.4.19 is "done" this box will go into production as soon as this RC2 VM
stuff is cleared up.


On Fri, 2002-07-19 at 15:17, anton wilson wrote:
> On Friday 19 July 2002 03:54 pm, J Sloan wrote:
> > Use 2.4-aa, 2.4-ac or 2.4-redhat kernel
> > and you get the O(1) secheduler at
> > no extra cost -
> >
> 
> 
> > Joe
> 
> 
> I'm actually worried not about just the O(1) scheduler but if these patches 
> will be incorporating the O(1) bug fixes such as the serious one in 
> balance_load where curr->next was used instead of current->prev. Also, I need 
> to use a patch that won't tamper with the usb implementation because I'd have 
> to update our current usb driver to fit into the new system, and I'm getting 
> flack about wasting time trying to update that thing already . . . So if you 
> tell me no, I can go tell my boss I have to update the usb driver.
> 
> 
> Anton
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
-- 
Austin Gonyou <austin@digitalroadkill.net>