You are not logged in.
As the title says, I'm compiling some software in the background. I have set all processes to nice=19 and I have checked in the system monitor that is indeed the case (all top cpu processes have nice = 19).
But then the chromium or intellij or any other application for that matter still lags a lot and presents sluggish behavior. Even if I set their nice level to -20.
Why is that?
Last edited by technolog (2015-03-30 16:26:33)
Offline
Out of physical memory? Is the disk drive thrashing?
Nothing is too wonderful to be true, if it be consistent with the laws of nature -- Michael Faraday
Sometimes it is the people no one can imagine anything of who do the things no one can imagine. -- Alan Turing
---
How to Ask Questions the Smart Way
Offline
CPU scheduler? I/O scheduler? Which one do you use?
Offline
I'm not out of memory.
I/O scheduler shouldn't matter (it's CFQ), CPU scheduler is the default, I did not change anything from default Arch install.
It's not that I am unable to work, but everything feels really sluggish. A lot more than usual.
Last edited by technolog (2015-03-30 16:46:36)
Offline
If not memory consumption then this is where bfs excels.. Try the linux-ck kernel from the AUR or from my repo and report back.
CPU-optimized Linux-ck packages @ Repo-ck • AUR packages • Zsh and other configs
Offline
Maybe you should tell us what package you're compiling and set options in /etc/makepkg.conf . Or details on your hardware for that matter.
Mods are just community members who have the occasionally necessary option to move threads around and edit posts. -- Trilby
Offline
I am compiling chromium with ozone (-O3, -march=native). All compiler processes have nice = 19.
I have run scala compiler which normally takes around 10s for this program, but now it took just under half a minute.
I guess I'll check out linux-ck as suggested.
Offline
I'm compiling software often as well, and the system has been very responsive even at spikes of 100% on all of my 4 cores. I am using linux-ck, so maybe it's that, as others suggested. I've been very pleased with the overall performance of the -ck kernel so far, the only issue I ever had were random kernel panics with the BFQ scheduler enabled for my SSD... (I always confuse BFS and BFQ, the BFQ is the disk scheduler, right?)
[ Arch x86_64 | linux | Framework 13 | AMD Ryzen™ 5 7640U | 32GB RAM | KDE Plasma Wayland ]
Offline
Yes, BFQ is the IO scheduler while BFS is the CPUS scheduler. BFQ is optional while BFS is enabled by default in linux-ck.
CPU-optimized Linux-ck packages @ Repo-ck • AUR packages • Zsh and other configs
Offline