Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44

Geert Bosch
2007-04-21T17:24:20Z

On Apr 21, 2007, at 12:18, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Also, I believe that (in shells), most forked processes do not even
> consume
> a full timeslice (eg: $(uname -n) is very fast). This means that
> assigning
> them with a shorter one will not hurt them while preserving the
> shell's
> performance against CPU hogs.

On a fast machine, during regression testing of GCC, I've noticed we
create
an average of 500 processes per second during an hour or so. There
are other
work loads like this. So, most processes start, execute and complete
in 2ms.
How does fairness work in a situation like this?

-Geert