Re: Linux scheduler capabilities for batch jobs.
From: Bill Davidsen
Date: Wed Jun 03 2009 - 17:14:28 EST
Rik van Riel wrote:
J Louis wrote:
If it was possible to tell
the scheduler that it was OK not to be fair when scheduling these
processes, I think the total runtime could be reduced if it put some
of the processes to sleep while others completed. Is there a way to
tell the scheduler it is allowed to do this? Should there be?
There is no way to do this currently, but I suspect that it
would not be too difficult to add.
Of course, if you have two tasks that are each a little larger
than memory, your idea could lead to one of the processes being
starved forever. This is probably not acceptable :)
In fact, one single batch process that is swapping could trigger
the algorithm you described, halting itself. Your idea would
need very carefuly implementation to avoid these kinds of issues,
but I believe it could definately be done.
I think it gets doubly hard because the processes may have parts swapped even if
there isn't memory pressure, so you can't just use percentage in memory. If you
were going to do this in an effective way you would really need to monitor swap
rate per process, and factor in total size, so it's not trivial. Of course in
the extreme cases it would be hard to avoid improvement, so it need not be
perfect to be helpful.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
Even purely technical things can appear to be magic, if the documentation is
obscure enough. For example, PulseAudio is configured by dancing naked around a
fire at midnight, shaking a rattle with one hand and a LISP manual with the
other, while reciting the GNU manifesto in hexadecimal. The documentation fails
to note that you must circle the fire counter-clockwise in the southern
hemisphere.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/