Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 08:41:33 -0500 (EST) From: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu> To: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: potentially simpler approach than scheduler activations. Message-ID: <14868.39578.928654.157924@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> In-Reply-To: <20001116140506.Q830@fw.wintelcom.net> References: <20001116140506.Q830@fw.wintelcom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alfred Perlstein writes: <...> > > I know that by applying these band-aids we aren't completely > solving every problem and as new interfaces pop-up we might > have to apply more band-aids to libc_r, but I think this > might get us past the point of system that breaks down on > disk IO. <...> This sounds like a really good idea to me, as long as it is qualified as an interum solution until KSE is ready and not a competitor to it. Drew ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Andrew Gallatin, Sr Systems Programmer http://www.cs.duke.edu/~gallatin Duke University Email: gallatin@cs.duke.edu Department of Computer Science Phone: (919) 660-6590 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?14868.39578.928654.157924>