Re: 2.6.12-ck4

From: Christian Hesse
Date: Wed Jul 27 2005 - 06:30:14 EST

On Wednesday 27 July 2005 13:11, Con Kolivas wrote:
> HZ-864.diff
> +My take on the never ending config HZ debate. Apart from the number not
> being pleasing on the eyes, a HZ value that isn't a multiple of 10 is
> perfectly valid. Setting HZ to 864 gives us very similar low latency
> performance to a 1000HZ kernel, decreases overhead ever so slightly, and
> minimises clock drift substantially. The -server patch uses HZ=82 for
> similar reasons, with the emphasis on throughput rather than low latency.
> Madness? Probably, but then I can't see any valid argument against using
> these values.

Some time ago I tried with HZ=209, but the system then freezes after a few
minutes... Any ideas what could be the reason? Are only even numbers allowed?


Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature