Interesting analysis of linux kernel threading by IBM

[Mike Porter]

On Thu, 20 Jan 2000, Peter Rival wrote:

> Horst von Brand wrote:
> 
> > "Davide Libenzi" <davidel en maticad.it> said:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > my patch has great performance ( 80% with 300 tasks ) with a lot of tasks
> > > and low overhead ( 1.5% with 2 tasks ).
> > > And my patch has 0.00 optimizations about CPU fetches and Co.
> > > IMVHO 1-1.5 % of overhead is a price the we can afford given the performace
> > > with many tasks.
> > > My patch equals the current implementation with 8 tasks.
> >
> > So it is a net loss. This machine here (a personal workstation) has
> > typically 1 to 3 running tasks.
> >
> > Hondreds of tasks is just not a typical (perhaps even realistic)
> > workload.
> 
> No offense, but it is this type of thinking that will keep Linux out of the
> datacenter.  What you must say it is not a typical (or realistic) workload _for
> me_.  Hundreds of tasks is trivial here - we have systems running with well over

I don't understand.  I thought we were talking about the 'ready to
run queue' or whatever it is called on Linux?  On our large sun
boxes, we have 400-600 users logged in, but the load average is
just a 'couple'.  On OS/390, we have hundreds of 'processes' - TCBs
actually, but not many are actually waiting for CPU.  Just a
few...

Mike


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo en vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/