Re: 2.6.12-ck4

[Christian Hesse <mail@earthworm.de>]

On Wednesday 27 July 2005 13:11, Con Kolivas wrote:
> HZ-864.diff
> +My take on the never ending config HZ debate. Apart from the number not
> being pleasing on the eyes, a HZ value that isn't a multiple of 10 is
> perfectly valid. Setting HZ to 864 gives us very similar low latency
> performance to a 1000HZ kernel, decreases overhead ever so slightly, and
> minimises clock drift substantially. The -server patch uses HZ=82 for
> similar reasons, with the emphasis on throughput rather than low latency.
> Madness? Probably, but then I can't see any valid argument against using
> these values.

Some time ago I tried with HZ=209, but the system then freezes after a few 
minutes... Any ideas what could be the reason? Are only even numbers allowed?

-- 
Christian

Attachment: pgpyOBmoXak21.pgp
Description: PGP signature