>From: <bryce at kampjes.demon.co.uk>
>Reply-To: The general-purpose Squeak developers 
>list<squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
>To: The general-purpose Squeak developers 
>list<squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
>Subject: Re: Alternative Thread Schedulers
>Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 21:20:50 +0100
>
>At some point it would be nice to have some scheduling support for
>Exupery. When running as a background compiler Exupery runs in a
>separate, Squeak, process. Ideally, Exupery should be allowed all the
>time when nothing else is going on but not starved completely if the
>process is busy so the system can still optimize itself under load.
>
>Exupery shouldn't be able to starve other processes or get starved
>itself.
>
>Bryce

I think the scheduler I described would do this.  Theoretically it would be 
possible for the high priority processes to keep using the CPU so that 
Exupery never gets to run, but in practice I think the processes will either 
stay off the CPU (which is why they are high priority) or if they do use the 
processor too much they get demoted until they are at the same priority of 
Exupery, at which point he can run.

_________________________________________________________________
Like the way Microsoft Office Outlook works? You’ll love Windows Live 
Hotmail. 
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_outlook_0507