> I think I need to reiterate some of the goals from when the scheduler > was written. I thought these were made pretty clear then and are > captured in the documentation Bruce has written.
I try to read most of -dev, still it takes a bit of digging and derivation to arrive at how the scheduler works even with the documentation. Especially regarding behavior that some of us may have foolishly become accustomed to. > First, above all else, the behavior must be deterministic. The > scheduler is run many times and the results can't change just because > something comes out of the database in a different order. How many times do I have to hear deterministic before someone realizes that what I want (and what was there, at least in this aspect) isn't non-deterministic? > Maybe there > are other ways, but to me this implies having specific rules to break > priority ties when they occur. In this case some of the rules are simply applied too soon. My issue was with the order of operation not with your design goals. > Now, that all being said, I think the SchedMoveHigher behavior can be > extended to automatically apply to programs of equal priority without > violating the above goals. The attached patch attempts to do this for > anyone who wants to test it. I think you've done a good job with the scheduler, this is the only case I've encountered where I disliked what it did by default. > To anyone unsatisfied with this, they're > welcome to submit patches or write their own scheduler. If the expected result of raising an issue is a thread like this one, I imagine something like that will be the only satisfactory path remaining. I don't want to write a scheduler (mostly I don't want to maintain one, and put up with people like me poking at it), I don't want to break your scheduler, I also don't want you and Mr. Markey to act like I insulted your lineage. I was fully prepared to send a patch once I had established I wasn't alone in my confusion/desire/had some inkling I'd be headed down the right path. > Now, that all being said, I think the SchedMoveHigher behavior can be > extended to automatically apply to programs of equal priority without > violating the above goals. The attached patch attempts to do this for > anyone who wants to test it. Thank you. -- Anduin Withers
_______________________________________________ mythtv-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-dev
