On Thursday 15 March 2007 11:21, Randall R Schulz wrote:
> > It does do user-level preemptive multitasking but not kernel level.
>
> Perhaps you're drawing some real distinction here, but I'm not sure what
> it is.
The distinction (which I am now re-researching) is that there is a
difference
between preemptable and interruptable. Interrupt driven is not precisely the
same thing as preemptive from a scheduler standpoint--- dispatching based on
interrupts vs dispatching based on master scheduling and time-slice. Windoze
(at least in my experience) does not seem to faithfully schedule kernel
processes according to true preemptive scheduling... seems like the kernel
gets preferential treatment and often the entire system resource is hogged by
the kernel at the expense of user space.
I have to go back now and restudy this... but I am thinking that Kai is
correct... NT didn't have it right..... and it sure didn't match up with OS/2
or the 2.0.36 kernel (linux at the time).
--
Kind regards,
M Harris <><
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
