[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       freebsd-arch
Subject:    Re: potentially simpler approach than scheduler activations.
From:       Alfred Perlstein <bright () wintelcom ! net>
Date:       2000-11-18 8:47:07
[Download RAW message or body]

* Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> [001117 19:42] wrote:
> On Friday, 17 November 2000 at  9:45:43 -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
> >>> 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.
> >
> > Also KSE's will never be back ported to RELENG_4.  Maybe some of these
> > ideas can be.
> 
> I see this as diluting the effort.  Once we have a bandaid, we'll be
> less concerned about doing the right thing.  And deliberately
> introducing different semantics in RELENG_4 seems not to be the Right
> Thing To Do.

This wasn't meant to start a discussion whether it was an evil
thing to do or not, it was meant to provide a framework for someone
with the time and skill to do it.

Please stop discussing the relative merits, I proposed this idea
knowing full well that KSE is better, this is just easier to
implement and a worthy project for someone wanting to take that
extra step into some hardcode programming.

But you can't satisfy everyone can you?

-- 
-Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]
"I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]