Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 02:11:56 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com> To: "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com> Cc: Chris Csanady <cc@137.org>, Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Threads goals version III Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9911070210280.10573-100000@current1.whistle.com> In-Reply-To: <38252EE8.5F627E51@newsguy.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The trouble is that 'quanti' are only useful in discussion when related to the rest of the processes and the system load. On Sun, 7 Nov 1999, Daniel C. Sobral wrote: > Chris Csanady wrote: > > > > I don't see the problem. So, you ask for two quantum--they will end > > up being on the same CPU in this case. They may still be scheduled in > > different classes as you please. > > > > The idea is that you don't want to do this in general, because you > > have more context switches than necessary, and increased process > > migration. Asking for the same number of quanta as CPU's is simply > > the optimal case. > > > > Or, at least that is how I understand it.. > > /me mmmms > > Let's see what Terry says. What you describe makes sense, but he > won't be able to use so few words. :-) > > -- > Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) > dcs@newsguy.com > dcs@freebsd.org > > What y'all wanna do? > Wanna be hackers? Code crackers? Slackers > Wastin' time with all the chatroom yakkers? > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.9911070210280.10573-100000>