1 |
"by selecting a suitable |
2 |
process scheduler and configuring your HZ to 1000" |
3 |
|
4 |
It is already done. (the Hz). |
5 |
Well thanks very much for these information (you and other people on this |
6 |
thread). I believe what you say but I believe too what I see with my own |
7 |
eyes. If we will ever meet on a Gentoo conference or anything, I'll show my |
8 |
faster X11 with negative nice level. ;) Anyway I'm running it with default |
9 |
nice level (0) for some days because X11 is very unstable with -15 niceness. |
10 |
|
11 |
2008/5/15 Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com>: |
12 |
|
13 |
> On Thursday 15 May 2008, Abraham Gyorgy wrote: |
14 |
> > I know X runs always as root. But setting the X server process' |
15 |
> > priority to for example -10 makes graphical software response faster. |
16 |
> > It works for me!! (no matter the system hangs sometimes :). |
17 |
> > I think you have a fast machine, try it with a very slow computer |
18 |
> > (sempron processor and radeon xpress200m+fglrx). |
19 |
> |
20 |
> Please don't top post in this forum. |
21 |
> |
22 |
> Look, you are talking about running the X session as root. That doesn't |
23 |
> make sense as an "X session" is e.g. gnome or kde which runs as the |
24 |
> user. I fail to see how the X client programs have any effect on the |
25 |
> the responsiveness of the server, yet this is exactly what you are |
26 |
> saying. Then you talk about vulnerabilities in the client apps with an |
27 |
> implication that this can somehow affect the server which runs as root. |
28 |
> But that is just not true, except if a client can exploit a |
29 |
> vulnerability in the server (which is to my mind not what you are |
30 |
> saying). |
31 |
> |
32 |
> Finally, there is very little point in debating this topic. If Linus |
33 |
> says that niceness has never had a whole lot of effect in Linux, and |
34 |
> that perceived differences are entirely due to reducing the latency a |
35 |
> specific app experiences, then I am going to go with the one guy that |
36 |
> knows the subject and consider your experiences to be anecdotal. |
37 |
> |
38 |
> You'll probably get better results with X by selecting a suitable |
39 |
> process scheduler and configuring your HZ to 1000 |
40 |
> |
41 |
> |
42 |
> |
43 |
> |
44 |
> > 2008/5/14 Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com>: |
45 |
> > > On Wednesday 14 May 2008, Josh Cepek wrote: |
46 |
> > > > > lapitopi gyuszk # snice -15 X |
47 |
> > > > |
48 |
> > > > As already pointed out, running process with a nice value less |
49 |
> > > > than 0 can only be done by root, and it's usually a really bad |
50 |
> > > > idea to run your entire X session as root. X (and applications |
51 |
> > > > running under X) involve a lot of code, and vulnerabilities can |
52 |
> > > > exist in this code. |
53 |
> > > |
54 |
> > > I think you don't know how X runs. |
55 |
> > > |
56 |
> > > X *always* runs as root on Linux so whether you nice it to 19 or |
57 |
> > > -19 is not relevant. It was only very very recently that someone |
58 |
> > > got X to run as a user. Do you disagree or should I elaborate? |
59 |
> > > |
60 |
> > > -- |
61 |
> > > Alan McKinnon |
62 |
> > > alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
63 |
> > > |
64 |
> > > -- |
65 |
> > > gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list |
66 |
> |
67 |
> |
68 |
> |
69 |
> -- |
70 |
> Alan McKinnon |
71 |
> alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
72 |
> |
73 |
> -- |
74 |
> gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list |
75 |
> |
76 |
> |