[Clfs-support] Process scheduling and chrt

[jignesh gangani]

Thanks ken.

I started to notice things when I was copying large files to and fro
(but not frequently),
writing CDs etc (when I note load average is around 2-3 and no
dominant process exist), I see my box becomes sluggish. On the
contrary, I have seen Linux distribution performing better (than mine)
in such situation(s). It May be because I am running Beryl or few
services extra (ntp, clamd and likes) but I think my processor (AMD64)
and my graphics card (NVIDIA 6600GT to handle Beryl) are fast enough
to cope up with these situations. Otherwise I am happy with my Linux
box. My concern was is it because I am not running some critical
services (kswapd, migration(?), and disk driver) with real time
priority, the PC is becoming sluggish? I will try util-linux-ng. Are
there any performance enhancement pointers that my fellow (C/B)LFS
users have noted? I am unable to find any in LFS archives.


On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 4:28 AM, Ken Moffat <zarniwhoop at ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 10:25:12PM +0530, jignesh gangani wrote:
>  > Hello,
>  >
>  > When I do 'top' on my system I do not see any process running with
>  > Real Time Priority but when I do 'top'
>  > on distros like RHEL or SuSE, I see some processes are running with
>  > Real Time Priority. When I searched
>  > for running processes with real time priority I get 'chrt' which is
>  > part of util-linux package.  When I searched
>  > for it on my system, I didn't get this command even though I have
>  > installed util-linux-2.12r package. Any
>  > comments?
>  >
>  > Mine is Pure64 Linux built using CLFS-1.0.0.
>  >
>   First question - why does it matter ?
>
>   Second question, if it really does matter - if you use the current
>  svn version (with util-linux-ng) does it match what happens on current
>  fedora and open-suse ?  If not, what are they doing differently
>  (take a look at their spec files), and why haven't they persuaded
>  upstream to do likewise ?  I don't ask about what happens on RHEL
>  because it is usually old, and carrying a lot of patches to backport
>  various changes to older versions.
>
>   Alternatively, maybe it's a change to 'top' - I'm not at all
>  familiar with looking for real-time priority in it.
>
>   The general rule of the LFS-family of books is that we think the
>  package developers usually know what to do.  Sometimes, particularly
>  on pure64 builds, that isn't always the case,
>
>  ĸen
>  --
>  das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce
>  _______________________________________________
>  Clfs-support mailing list
>  Clfs-support at lists.cross-lfs.org
>  http://lists.cross-lfs.org/listinfo.cgi/clfs-support-cross-lfs.org
>



-- 

Jignesh D. Gangani