Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!news.sprintlink.net!dorite!not-for-mail From: root@dyson.iquest.net (John S. Dyson) Subject: Re: iijppp and kernel ppp device Message-ID: <3u6p1i$gs@dyson.iquest.net> Lines: 23 Sender: news@iquest.net (News Admin) Organization: John S. Dyson's Machine References: <3u3co4$hur@Mars.mcs.com> <3u4v3n$5ie@agate.berkeley.edu> <mschoene.805713265@hobbes> <3u5mi0$gk0@agate.berkeley.edu> Date: Fri, 14 Jul 1995 21:53:54 GMT In article <3u5mi0$gk0@agate.berkeley.edu>, Jordan K. Hubbard <jkh@violet.berkeley.edu> wrote: >In article <mschoene.805713265@hobbes>, >Martin Schoenert <mschoene@Math.RWTH-Aachen.DE> wrote: >>jkh@violet.berkeley.edu (Jordan K. Hubbard) writes: >> >> Have you tried giving the ppp process real-time priority? (see >> rtprio(2) :-) >> >>Why the smiley? >>Do you think the 'ppp' process would starve the rest of the system? > >I don't think it'd necessarily starve it, though that depends a lot on >the resources it's using up. It would certainly drastically reduce the >system's proclivity for swapping it out though. In fact -- processes that have rtprio set should never be swapped out. They can be paged -- but the additional overhead of swapping is eliminated (at least that is what the code is supposed to do) :-). John dyson@root.com