No OS except recent Linux has a static priority scheduling policy.
On 04-Aug-2010 7:38 AM, Nicolás Alvarez wrote: > Isn't this the job of the operating system's process scheduler? > > Enviado desde mi iPod > > El 04/08/2010, a las 00:28, David Anderson <[email protected]> > escribió: > >> The suggestion is: >> if the non-BOINC CPU load on a 4-CPU system is 25%, >> BOINC should use only 3 CPUs. >> Seems reasonable to me. >> Comments? >> -- David >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: RE: Enhancement suggestion: CPU Usage exceeds parameter >> Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 20:57:43 -0400 >> From: Sean White <[email protected]> >> To: 'David Anderson' <[email protected]> >> >> I though NCPU's was not the % of CPU's, but the number BIONC was >> allowed to >> use? In the parameters panel - this is listed as % of processors - so if >> this is the units, then your expression makes sense. How would you mange >> the current 'over allocation' allowed which allows you to fully task the >> CPU's as well as GPU's? Or -- if the over allocation is A, then BIONC >> would >> allow for peak processor usage to spike to NCPU's-X+A, and continue to >> push? >> >> >> The reason for a more involved process would be to attempt to detect when >> the user or another pre-scheduled task is actually using the computer >> (i.e. >> gaming, watching a video, video recording etc) where the user >> experience or >> task is often time sensitive and may peak to higher usage levels. The >> more >> complicated approach assumes that the only tasks running on the computer >> that would consume any significant fraction of a single CPU's time are >> 'critical' or 'important' tasks. Assuming that there is some element of >> time-criticality to any of these means that BIONC would need to back off >> further than just "x" to give sufficent room as to minimize the time >> critical impact. I suppose that this could be done by monitoring both the >> average non-BIONC CPU usage over a period as well as the Standard >> deviation >> of the CPU usage. If the average is over a threshold (configurable?) then >> BIONC scales back by X + 2 Standard Deviations to ensure that overhead is >> available proportional to the peak processor usage over a period. If the >> average usage is below the threshold, the 'noise' is ignored. >> >> -Sean. >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: David Anderson [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 7:09 PM >> To: Sean White >> Cc: BOINC Developers Mailing List >> Subject: Re: Enhancement suggestion: CPU Usage exceeds parameter >> >> That's a good idea. >> I'd been thinking about something similar. >> What I was thinking was to eliminate the preference, >> and just change things so that if non-BOINC CPU usage is X, >> BOINC will use at most NCPUs - X. >> -- David >> >> On 26-Jul-2010 2:37 PM, Sean White wrote: >>> David, >>> >>> >>> I've been a longtime BIONC fan, and had an 'enhancement' suggestion with >>> respect to the 'cpu usuage' exceeds 'parameter' feature. Instead of >>> shutting down the entire set of processess when the cpu usage exceeds a >>> threshold, it would make more sense to roll back usage 1 CPU at a time. >>> >>> If a computer has Y CPU's available for use, and the 'other process >>> usage' parameter is set to value X, then when Non-BIONC Usage /Y > X for >>> a minimum time interval 'T', then we freeze one BIONC process, freeing 1 >>> CPU to manage the non-BIONC tasks. The next trip occurs when Non-BIONC >>> usage / Y > (1/Y+X). (I.e. when the non-BIONC tasks load up the 1 CPU >>> and start impinging on the 2^nd CPU, we drop the second CPU out). I >>> would suggest that a reasonable 'drop out time' is 1s or so? (whatever >>> is currently used). >>> >>> This approach would eliminate the annoying 'entire BIONC all tasks >>> offline' event which I encounter when multiple tasks happen to end at >>> the same time, or when you open another application that happens to need >>> all of 1 CPU briefly to get going. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> >>> Sean W. >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> boinc_dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev >> To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and >> (near bottom of page) enter your email address. _______________________________________________ boinc_dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
