this post was submitted on 07 May 2025
13 points (100.0% liked)
Linux Questions
1850 readers
1 users here now
Linux questions Rules (in addition of the Lemmy.zip rules)
- stay on topic
- be nice (no name calling)
- do not post long blocks of text such as logs
- do not delete your posts
- only post questions (no information posts)
Tips for giving and receiving help
- be as clear and specific
- say thank you if a solution works
- verify your solutions before posting them as facts.
Any rule violations will result in disciplinary actions
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
zen and lts as fallback
iirc zen has a scheduler that is supposed to be better for single user multitask desktop situations, while the regular kernel scheduler is better for server workloads.
Do you have any data to show it actually is better?
Desktop and server workloads aren't that different in practice.
It is very hard to measure responsiveness (which is basically the only thing zen claims to be better at) without a lot of time investment and a high speed camera for frame analysis.
I guess a possible setup would be to run a multicore synthetic workload that takes most of the system resources and measuring the start time desktop applications.
But nobody has done it in a "scientific" way as far as I can see. Besides some hobbyist anecdotal observations:
https://reddit.rtrace.io/r/linux/comments/fh0hc2/its_time_for_desktop_distributions_to_adopt_a/
https://forum.garudalinux.org/t/kernel-benchmarking-results-zen-cacule-tkg-bore/18831/8