By: Shankhadeep (shank15217.delete@this.yahoo.com), July 27, 2007 11:52 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
Well it turns out the issue of fair scheduling for a better desktop experience has already been integrated into the kernel. A possible reason why Con stopped kernel development is that Linux code maintainers decided to use the code from another developer.
Jukka Larja (roskakori2006@gmail.com) on 7/27/07 wrote:
---------------------------
>Foo_ (foo@nomail.com) on 7/26/07 wrote:
>---------------------------
>> The hardware may be the same, but the use cases are not
>> and thus the kind of "support" needed is not the same.
>> "Supporting" SMP in the sense of improving database
>> workload throughput is not the same as "supporting"
>> SMP in the sense of improving desktop latency in the
>> face of e.g. interactive applications running side-to-side
>> with CPU-heavy background tasks. They are different
>> problems with possibly different optimal solutions.
>
>Sure, but at least there is SMP support (or "support" whatever you mean by that)
>for desktop (I don't know if that is a very good example. Perhaps SMP support in
>general is so trivial thing to add that the fact that servers needed it first didn't
>have any effect on desktop). Perhaps there are some other similar technologies.
>
>-JLarja
Jukka Larja (roskakori2006@gmail.com) on 7/27/07 wrote:
---------------------------
>Foo_ (foo@nomail.com) on 7/26/07 wrote:
>---------------------------
>> The hardware may be the same, but the use cases are not
>> and thus the kind of "support" needed is not the same.
>> "Supporting" SMP in the sense of improving database
>> workload throughput is not the same as "supporting"
>> SMP in the sense of improving desktop latency in the
>> face of e.g. interactive applications running side-to-side
>> with CPU-heavy background tasks. They are different
>> problems with possibly different optimal solutions.
>
>Sure, but at least there is SMP support (or "support" whatever you mean by that)
>for desktop (I don't know if that is a very good example. Perhaps SMP support in
>general is so trivial thing to add that the fact that servers needed it first didn't
>have any effect on desktop). Perhaps there are some other similar technologies.
>
>-JLarja
Topic | Posted By | Date |
---|---|---|
Linux on Desktops | Shankhadeep | 2007/07/25 10:46 AM |
Linux on Desktops | Paul | 2007/07/25 11:42 AM |
Linux on Desktops | Shankhadeep | 2007/07/25 02:15 PM |
Linux on Desktops | Max | 2007/07/25 02:43 PM |
Linux on Desktops | JasonB | 2007/07/26 11:38 PM |
Linux on Desktops | Foo_ | 2007/07/26 02:53 AM |
Linux on Desktops | Michael S | 2007/07/26 04:22 AM |
Linux on Desktops | Paul | 2007/07/26 01:56 PM |
Linux on Desktops | Foo_ | 2007/07/26 02:34 PM |
Linux on Desktops | Jukka Larja | 2007/07/27 04:42 AM |
Linux on Desktops | Shankhadeep | 2007/07/27 11:52 AM |
Linux on Desktops | Shankhadeep | 2007/07/27 12:00 PM |
Linux on Desktops | _Arthur | 2007/07/27 02:56 PM |
Linux on Desktops | Linus Torvalds | 2007/07/25 12:03 PM |
Linux on Desktops | Shankhadeep | 2007/07/25 01:36 PM |
Linux on Desktops | Arun Ramakrishnan | 2007/07/25 08:11 PM |