https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6996
RW <rwmailli...@googlemail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |rwmailli...@googlemail.com
--- Comment #4 from RW <rwmailli...@googlemail.com> ---
(In reply to Mark Martinec from comment #2)
> I don't remember exactly why the 'managed' scheduling was introduced,
> seems to me the only reason is to provide dynamic scaling of the
> number of child processes. When one wants a fixed number of processes,
> I think the 'autonomous' is just as good, if no better (for its
> simplicity).
The original reason was better performance under paging. By assigning work to
the free child with the lowest pid, a number of "hot" processes can retain
their resident memory and the higher pid children can be paged-out without much
affect on performance. Also since most relevant OS's that support forking
assign increasing PIDs, some most-recently created children will remain in an
immediate post-fork state reducing SA's overall resident memory usage. In
comparison round-robin or random child allocation is close to worse-case in all
respects.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
