On Tuesday 16 November 2010, 22:14:31 Lennart Poettering wrote:
wrote:
Lennart, would you mind pointing me the the paragraph that states,
autogroup excludes any other improvements in this area?
In contrary, Linus clearly states, that this solves a long standing use
case, that _he_ is suffering from a lot, and I bet, most of us in one
or another way.. And it contains all that is needed: a fine selection
of knobs for switching on/off that beast. Hopefully it can be taught to
reveal some of its internal mechanics to the world, then all is fine.
If you think, that systemd can solve this and probably other aspects of
responsiveness, go for it, compete with it, and _prove_ it with real
facts and numbers, not just hand waving.
As already mentioned countless times (and some of it was even renamed
for this very fact): the grouping by tty is just a starter. There are
plenty of other possibilities to group the scheduling. The hard part is
to find the right grouping concepts, that are making sense in the
usability department _and_ are easy enough to be picked up from our
favorite system and desktop environments. That's where the generic
cgroup concept seems to be lacking ATM..
In one year from now on, our preferred distros will show, who won this
competition. Probably both of you ;-)
Pete
--
