Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sat 13th Mar 2004 09:07 UTC
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
More News »
Sponsored Links



No, you cannot have the best of both worlds. When I log into my "server" it SHOULD keep high throughput and my interactive (shell) process should not get the kind of response it needs on the desktop.
Don't be a dumbass. There are two things that would allow one to have the best performace for both types of systems. You could have more than one scheduler and use whatever one best suits your needs (Linux does this), or you could have (better yet) an adaptive scheduler that modifies it's behavior as needed.
It is your thinking that leaves something to be desired. There are few things in this world that we cannot eventually do. Having an OS that can work out of the box as either a server or as a desktop isn't one of those things that we will be denied.
Learn to think.