Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 1 Jan 2003 12:06:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 1 Jan 2003 12:06:46 -0500 Received: from dsl2-09018-wi.customer.centurytel.net ([209.206.215.38]:34213 "HELO thomasons.org") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id convert rfc822-to-8bit; Wed, 1 Jan 2003 12:06:45 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: scott thomason Reply-To: scott@thomasons.org To: Bill Davidsen , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Impact of scheduler tunables on interactive response (was Re: [BENCHMARK] scheduler tunables with contest - prio_bonus_ratio) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 11:15:12 -0600 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: <200301011115.12899.scott@thomasons.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 861 Lines: 20 On Wednesday 01 January 2003 10:05 am, Bill Davidsen wrote: > This sounds very like my resp2 (www.unyuug.org/benchmarks/) program > I announced on this list some months ago, but resp2 generates loads > of a specific type so that you can determine of changes affect i/o > load, swapping load, CPU load, etc Have you (or anyone else) used resp2 to measure the impact of the scheduler tunables on interactive responsiveness yet, and if so, what are your conclusions? Also, your benchmark page doesn't list a URL for resp2. Sure, I could Google for one, but wouldn't it be nice to update your page, too? ---scott - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/