Hi
On 2002.01.07 00:48 martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach dman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.06.2127 +0100]:
> | i even went as far as to renice xmms to -20 *and*
> | rsync/bzip/gzip/make-kpkg to 20, but it doesn't really help.
>
> Well, kernel compilation is very CPU intensive, and bzip2 can do
lots
> of computation as well. What you have is several (not just two) CPU
> intensive processes going, and one process that needs real-time CPU
> access. Unix is a time-sharing, but not real-time OS. xmms just
gets
> lucky if it doesn't skip. This is true for the general case of any
> process that needs real-time-like scheduling. Of course, the less
> load you have on your machine the more likely it is that xmms will
be
> scheduled often enough.
but any process with nice value -20 should take absolut precedence
over
other processes at higher nice levels, especially when the
resource-hog-process runs at nice level +20!!!
Just one thing: Are you using DMA on your hdd? This might make a big
difference, since doing anything vaguely HDD intensive w/o using DMA
works quite horribly.
To check, run
hdparm /dev/hda
or, whichever device represents your hdd in place of /dev/hda.
somehow this strikes me as *wrong*. heck, even windoze NT could do
that
better...
> That load average you have is way higher than mine is, except for
when
> I'm doing a lot of development (compiling/running some java stuff,
> which is when xmms has trouble for me). The system is still quite
> responsive for non-real-time and non-cpu-intensive activities (like
> reading/writing email).
mine isn't. and this was when all i was doing is rsync on the local
network (no ssh) and playing from xmms.
--
martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.)
\____ echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:"; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
chaos reigns within.
reflect, repent, reboot.
order shall return.
Cheers
Neilen
