COMP 3000 Essay 1 2010 Question 5: Difference between revisions
AbsMechanik (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
<br /> | <br /> | ||
-Sebastian | -Sebastian | ||
Also found a nice link with regards to the new Linux Scheduler for those interested: | |||
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-scheduler/ | |||
<br />It is also referred to as the O(1) scheduler in algorithmic terms (CFS is O(log(n)) scheduler). Both have been in development by Ingo Molnár. | |||
-Abhinav | |||
Revision as of 20:33, 3 October 2010
Question
Compare and contrast the evolution of the default BSD/FreeBSD and Linux schedulers.
Answer
Resources
I found some resources, which might be useful to answer this question. As far as I know, FreeBSD uses a Multilevel feeback queue and Linux uses in the current version the completly fair scheduler.
-Some text about FreeBSD-scheduling http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=366888&seqNum=4
-ULE Thread Scheduler: http://www.scribd.com/doc/3299978/ULE-Thread-Scheduler-for-FreeBSD
-Completly Fair Scheduler: http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/sched-design-CFS.txt
-Sebastian
Also found a nice link with regards to the new Linux Scheduler for those interested:
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-scheduler/
It is also referred to as the O(1) scheduler in algorithmic terms (CFS is O(log(n)) scheduler). Both have been in development by Ingo Molnár.
-Abhinav