On Sat, Aug 28, 1999 at 10:40:57PM +0200, Benno Senoner wrote: > - The disk performance decreases by 10-25% when I increase the CPU load in > the "latencytest" bench. > (On light CPU load there are no disk performance differences, > maybe this is related to higher scheduling overhead) > > I think most of us want to have these "low-latency" features in the upcoming > 2.4 kernel since it will make Linux a very good _MULTIMEDIA_OS_. A 25% disk i/o decrease is very serious. Lets get some serious feedback from people running internet and database servers before we blow off the server users in order to compete with BEOS.
- Low-latency patches working GREAT (<2.9ms audio latency),... Benno Senoner
- Re: [rtl] Low-latency patches working GREAT (<2.9ms ... yodaiken
- Re: [rtl] Low-latency patches working GREAT (<2.... Alan Cox
- Re: [rtl] Low-latency patches working GREAT (&l... yodaiken
- Re: [rtl] Low-latency patches working GREAT... Ingo Molnar
- Re: [rtl] Low-latency patches working ... yodaiken
- Re: [rtl] Low-latency patches work... Ingo Molnar
- Re: [rtl] Low-latency patches ... yodaiken
- Re: [rtl] Low-latency patches ... Ingo Molnar
- Re: [rtl] Low-latency patches ... yodaiken
- Re: [rtl] Low-latency patches ... Ingo Molnar
- Re: [rtl] Low-latency patches ... yodaiken
