Re: Why the niceness is not always taken into account ?

2013-04-19 Thread Alexandre Laurent
Ok :) Thank you very much :) Le 18.04.2013 19:30, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu a écrit : > On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 17:56:58 +0200, Alexandre Laurent said: > >> My question was more like : is there a way (like giving hint) to ask the autogroup system to group two SSH sesssions in order to get nice

Re: Why the niceness is not always taken into account ?

2013-04-18 Thread Valdis . Kletnieks
On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 17:56:58 +0200, Alexandre Laurent said: > My question was more like : is there a way (like giving hint) to ask > the autogroup system to group two SSH sesssions in order to get nice > behaving as expected without disabling the whole autogroup system. Sure. Launch both SSH'e

Re: Why the niceness is not always taken into account ?

2013-04-18 Thread Alexandre Laurent
I do not want to touch the kernel at all. I was giving the information about cgroups since it was one of the question asked before. I understood that the SCHED_AUTOGROUP is not using at all cgroups. My question was more like : is there a way (like giving hint) to ask the autogroup system to gro

Re: Why the niceness is not always taken into account ?

2013-04-18 Thread Valdis . Kletnieks
On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 16:57:41 +0200, Alexandre Laurent said: > Note : the cgroups are not mounted at all. The cgroups filesystem doesn't have to be mounted for that - the kernel handles that internally. > I still have a little question about it : > Is it possible to force the grouping of specific

Re: Why the niceness is not always taken into account ?

2013-04-18 Thread Alexandre Laurent
Hello, Disabling SCHED_AUTOGROUP (by using the flag kernel.sched_autogroup_enabled with sysctl) did work very well. Thank you a lot. This is understandable, when reading the following description : " This option optimizes the scheduler for common desktop workloads by automatically creating and

Re: Why the niceness is not always taken into account ?

2013-04-16 Thread Kristof Provost
On 2013-04-16 17:38:50 (+0200), Alexandre Laurent wrote: > On the computer where I am testing, I have nothing related to cgroups. > > Here a 'ps aux' in case I am missing something. cgroups wouldn't actually show up in the process list. Check mount to see if anyone mounts an fs of type 'cgroup'

Re: Why the niceness is not always taken into account ?

2013-04-16 Thread michi1
Hi! On 10:35 Tue 16 Apr , Alexandre Laurent wrote: ... > I am running the same test, but connecting twice on the remote machine > (one connection by test instance). I am using exactly the same commands > than during the others experiments. But, by using two SSH instances, > the > niceness wil

Re: Why the niceness is not always taken into account ?

2013-04-16 Thread Alexandre Laurent
On the computer where I am testing, I have nothing related to cgroups. Here a 'ps aux' in case I am missing something. USER PID %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME COMMAND root 1 0.0 0.0 10652 836 ? Ss avril09 0:03 init [2] root 2 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? S avril09 0:00 [kthreadd] root 3 0.0 0.0 0 0 ?

Re: Why the niceness is not always taken into account ?

2013-04-16 Thread Kristof Provost
On 2013-04-16 10:35:05 (+0200), Alexandre Laurent wrote: > My problem is that in some cases it is not working at all. It works > fine if I am running both programs in the same instance of the > terminal, > or from a script (so, same instance of interpreter). But this is not > working if I am run