Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 02 Jul 2007 07:31:47 -0500
From:      "Jack Stone" <>
Subject:   Re: kern.hz="100" stops high-pitched whine
Message-ID:  <BAY125-F3001869A4CBB8CAF4B378BCC0D0@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
>From: Chuck Swiger <>
>To: cpghost <>
>CC: questions <>
>Subject: Re: kern.hz="100" stops high-pitched whine
>Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 09:46:19 -0400
>cpghost wrote:
>>Are there any reasons NOT changing kern.hz from the
>>default 1000 back to 100? With my typical mix of
>>desktop apps (EPIA) and networking / server (Soekris),
>>everything seems to be running just as smoothly with
>>100 Hz than with 1000 Hz (testing now for two weeks
>>without problems). Even playing videos with mplayer
>>on the EPIA doesn't look different in any way.
>>Is it okay to stay with 100 Hz with this type of
>>low-speed CPU/boards? Or are there some compelling
>>reasons not to?
>Actually, many Unix systems ran with HZ=100 until a few years ago, about 
>when Gb ethernet and CPUs became common.  A slower machine like the EPIA 
>boxes do quite well with HZ=100/200/250 or so...HZ=1000 is better if you 
>have a fast box running lots of concurrent processes, and/or are proxying 
>or routing network traffic where the difference between 10 ms and 1ms of 
>latency adds up and/or effects other systems.

A while ago, I noticed someone's kernel config that included:
which made me wonder where this setting info comes from?

I've been using hertz=1000 however, with my much faster boxes, is this 
appropriate now?


PC Magazine’s 2007 editors’ choice for best Web mail—award-winning Windows 
Live Hotmail.

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>