Re: [LAU] Basic question about use of a lowlatency kernel

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <jonetsu@...>
Cc: <linux-audio-user@...>
Date: Monday, February 18, 2013 - 8:57 pm

--bcaec52d4d31bc269304d605f8e7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 3:36 PM, wrote:

> If a better response time from the kernel is something that's Good, why

latency and bandwidth are opposing goals. server oriented (compute-based
or storage-based) systems want to have the highest possible bandwidth, not
the lowest latency. generally, at least.

--bcaec52d4d31bc269304d605f8e7
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 3:36 PM, <j=
onetsu@teksavvy.com
> wrote:
If a better response time from the kernel is something that's Good, why=
isn't lowlatency kernels a default in Linux distros (well, at least in=
Linux Mint and Fedora) =A0If it is So Good, what are the arguments for not=
having a lowlatency kernel by default ?=A0
latency and bandwidth are opposing goals. server orie=
nted=A0 (compute-based or storage-based) systems want to have the highest p=
ossible bandwidth, not the lowest latency. generally, at least.

--bcaec52d4d31bc269304d605f8e7--

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [LAU] Basic question about use of a lowlatency kernel, Ralf Mardorf, (Mon Feb 18, 11:43 pm)
Re: [LAU] Basic question about use of a lowlatency kernel, Paul Davis, (Mon Feb 18, 8:57 pm)
Re: [LAU] Basic question about use of a lowlatency kernel, Federico Bruni, (Mon Feb 18, 8:43 pm)