[Vm-dev] ulimit rat-rio setting (was Re: [OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm] Do not use linux-latest runner, use an older stable version. (#598))

[Eliot Miranda]

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 11:49 PM Bruce O'Neel <bruce.oneel at pckswarms.ch>
wrote:

>
> Wow, now I feel really really old.
>
> So nicing the priority down will be fine on a single user system - which
> to be honest is probably 99.9+% of our users so no problem.
>

Remember that David is proposing lowering the priority of the threads in
the process, not the process itself.  It may be that thread priorities are
effectively global.  But it may be that they are only relative.  In which
case, lowering teh thread priorities may have no effect on the process's
priority.

>
> It is a bad idea, though very nice, on a multi user system espeically if
> heavily loaded.  It was always fun to nice a friend down and have them
> start asking why their emacs was taking 3 second per character now.
>
> So it is probably an ok idea.
>
> cheers
>
> bruce
>
> On 2021-09-30T08:11:53.000+02:00, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:
>
>   On 30. Sep 2021, at 04:46, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>   On Sep 29, 2021, at 5:32 PM, David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com> wrote:
>
>
>   On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 03:12:29PM -0700, tim Rowledge wrote:
>
>  This reminds me to ask (probably again) if anyone actually understands
>  ubuntu and getting the rtprio settings to 'take'.
>
>  I have the suggested /etc/security/limits.d/squeak.conf etc but it
>  appears to be ignored - at least the VM complains about it. Since
>  `ulimit -a` tells me that rtprio is 0, I suspect it is correct to
>  complain. I've spent way too long trying to make sense of what I
>  find with googling. This has been going on for ages (so, yes, the
>  machine has been rebooted) and every now and then I try to make some
>  sense of it.
>
>
>  Aside from the various discussions of how to work around this problem,
>  I would expect that the VM might better do something like this:
>
>  - Attempt to start the heartbeat thread at elevated priority.
>  - If successful, proceed as before (other threads at normal priority)
>  - If not successful, drop the process priority and start all other
>  threads at a lower priority.
>
>
>  +1.  Good idea!
>
>
> Right!
> It's obvious, in hindsight xD
> -t
>
>

-- 
_,,,^..^,,,_
best, Eliot
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/vm-dev/attachments/20210930/8b7b294e/attachment.html>