From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 1995 14:23:31 -0500
From: Andrew Hamilton-Wright andrewhw@uoguelph.ca
Subject: Graphics issues
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 3511d3ec-eac8-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025
Message-ID: <19951119192331.8B9g8TXUNv3nVMVp1uGjVBqQIgZxRSgIhbc1mfh1Oks@z>


John Carmack (johnc@idnewt.idsoftware.COM) wrote:

>Interactive priority scheduling would be an interesting thing to =

 [ deletia ]
 
>compute bound.  A compile running in the background should only =
>get cycles when all interactive applications are blocked on user =
>devices.  Perhapse processes could be classified "compute bound" =
>if they last blocked on a non-user IO device, and "interactive" if =
>they last blocked on mouse/keyboard.  If an interactive process =
>goes it's full (generous) timeslice without blocking again, =
>reclassify it until it again hits a user device.


The danger here is to forget that the processes associated with the
terminal may not be the only ones of importance on the machine.

There is a lot of good in plan9 for its ability to handle 
processes dealing with either remote or no, terminal in a 'fair'
way.


While game handling is important (!) -- we still want to be able
to handle large computational 'compiler type' sequences in the
background; and have them actually get a fair chunk of the CPU.
 


--
    andrew@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca          andrewhw@uoguelph.ca