Details about how process scheduler works?
in [Unix Programming]
|
From: Peter Olcott on 13 Apr 2010 14:28 Okay, thanks again for your help. I tried to fix my Outlook Express quoting so I would not have to top post, but the fix did not work. "David Schwartz" <davids(a)webmaster.com> wrote in message news:7d50f4d5-334a-49af-94b6-9dbd10174b17(a)u34g2000yqu.googlegroups.com... On Apr 12, 8:48 pm, "Peter Olcott" <NoS...(a)OCR4Screen.com> wrote: > Someone in another group said that the idea that you > mentioned in your last sentence had been universally > abandoned several decades ago because there was too much > OS > overhead involved with this. That's how progress goes. Ideas are adopted, abandoned, and then rediscovered. How much OS overhead matters in the scheduler, compared to how important it is that you do the most important work, has changed significantly, mostly due to the increasing complexity of CPU topology. > I came here to confirm or deny > the truth of this alternative view. Of course I could be > misparaphrasing what they said. It's going to depend on people's areas of experience. Someone who works with Windows a lot will have a different idea of what's common scheduler behavior than someone who only works with Linux. Linux's scheduling algorithm was recently completely replaced and the way priority works was completely changed. In most typical cases, the observable behavior will be the same. If the process with the highest priority always runs/pre-empts, then processes with close static priorities will wind up getting proportional CPU anyway as their dynamic priorities cause them to pre- empt each other. Processes with vastly differing static priorities will wind up giving the vast majority of the CPU to the higher- priority process (assuming it can use it) with either model. I honestly think your requirements are not unusual and you will have a hard time getting things to not work if you use the process priority model. But the best approach is going to be to test on the hardware you plan to use. Schedulers vary from OS to OS more than just about anything else. DS
From: Ian Collins on 13 Apr 2010 17:01 On 04/14/10 06:28 AM, Peter Olcott wrote: > Okay, thanks again for your help. I tried to fix my Outlook > Express quoting so I would not have to top post, but the fix > did not work. So junk it and use a decent client! -- Ian Collins
From: Peter Olcott on 13 Apr 2010 18:12 "Ian Collins" <ian-news(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:82k4eaF126U2(a)mid.individual.net... > On 04/14/10 06:28 AM, Peter Olcott wrote: >> Okay, thanks again for your help. I tried to fix my >> Outlook >> Express quoting so I would not have to top post, but the >> fix >> did not work. > > So junk it and use a decent client! > > -- > Ian Collins I can't afford to do that I have several years worth of crucial emails archived on it, and they can't be exported.
From: Baho Utot on 13 Apr 2010 18:26 Peter Olcott wrote: > > "Ian Collins" <ian-news(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:82k4eaF126U2(a)mid.individual.net... >> On 04/14/10 06:28 AM, Peter Olcott wrote: >>> Okay, thanks again for your help. I tried to fix my >>> Outlook >>> Express quoting so I would not have to top post, but the >>> fix >>> did not work. >> >> So junk it and use a decent client! >> >> -- >> Ian Collins > > I can't afford to do that I have several years worth of > crucial emails archived on it, and they can't be exported. What? Your emails are being held against there will? That in its self is reason enough to shift platforms to a more open one
From: Peter Olcott on 13 Apr 2010 18:42
"Baho Utot" <baho-utot(a)invalid.com> wrote in message news:dl7f97-o2d.ln1(a)lapu-lapu.bildanet.com... > Peter Olcott wrote: > >> >> "Ian Collins" <ian-news(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >> news:82k4eaF126U2(a)mid.individual.net... >>> On 04/14/10 06:28 AM, Peter Olcott wrote: >>>> Okay, thanks again for your help. I tried to fix my >>>> Outlook >>>> Express quoting so I would not have to top post, but >>>> the >>>> fix >>>> did not work. >>> >>> So junk it and use a decent client! >>> >>> -- >>> Ian Collins >> >> I can't afford to do that I have several years worth of >> crucial emails archived on it, and they can't be >> exported. > > What? > > Your emails are being held against there will? > > That in its self is reason enough to shift platforms to a > more open one > > Export is broken probably because of data corruption. |