On 03/17/2014 11:24 AM, Alex Shi wrote:
> On 03/13/2014 01:57 PM, Alex Shi wrote:
>> In the cpu_load decay usage, we mixed the long term, short term load with
>> balance bias, randomly pick a big/small value from them according to balance
>> destination or source. This mix is wrong, the balance
On 03/17/2014 11:24 AM, Alex Shi wrote:
On 03/13/2014 01:57 PM, Alex Shi wrote:
In the cpu_load decay usage, we mixed the long term, short term load with
balance bias, randomly pick a big/small value from them according to balance
destination or source. This mix is wrong, the balance bias
On 03/13/2014 01:57 PM, Alex Shi wrote:
> In the cpu_load decay usage, we mixed the long term, short term load with
> balance bias, randomly pick a big/small value from them according to balance
> destination or source. This mix is wrong, the balance bias should be based
> on task moving cost
On 03/13/2014 01:57 PM, Alex Shi wrote:
In the cpu_load decay usage, we mixed the long term, short term load with
balance bias, randomly pick a big/small value from them according to balance
destination or source. This mix is wrong, the balance bias should be based
on task moving cost between
In the cpu_load decay usage, we mixed the long term, short term load with
balance bias, randomly pick a big/small value from them according to balance
destination or source. This mix is wrong, the balance bias should be based
on task moving cost between cpu groups, not on random history or
In the cpu_load decay usage, we mixed the long term, short term load with
balance bias, randomly pick a big/small value from them according to balance
destination or source. This mix is wrong, the balance bias should be based
on task moving cost between cpu groups, not on random history or
6 matches
Mail list logo
