Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!mcvax!ukc!stc!inset!boyd
From: boyd@inset.UUCP (Boyd Roberts)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: 4.2bsd kernel auto-nicing, scheduling
Message-ID: <864@inset.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 10-Mar-86 09:19:00 EST
Article-I.D.: inset.864
Posted: Mon Mar 10 09:19:00 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 15-Mar-86 18:38:33 EST
References: <1014@brl-smoke.ARPA> <856@inset.UUCP> <3311@sun.uucp>
Reply-To: boyd@inset.UUCP (Boyd Roberts)
Organization: The Instruction Set Ltd., London, UK.
Lines: 28


  >> Some fairly viable work has been done on SHARE scheduling on UNIX
  >> in Australia.  You should check it out.  It actually uses some
  >> algorithms, and was even designed.
  >
  >Given that I don't speak English or Australian, just whatever we speak here
  >in the USofA (no, it's not American, considering Canadians don't speak
  >exactly the same language either, and they're (North) Americans as well),
  >what do you mean by "algorithms" here?

By "algorithm" I mean something that has been designed.  It was not
used in the definitive sense.  Or,

	Hack != Algorithm

Yes, there is a paper.  And, there should be a new one.  Ask "piers@basser.oz".

A "hack" is never a "solution", it's a "rabid mess".


Boyd Roberts

+++
+   ..!mcvax!ukc!inset!boyd
+   boyd@inset.co.uk
+   boyd@basser.oz
+
+++ "Isn't that kind of severe?"