On Fri, 2005-04-08 at 15:36 +0200, John Anderson wrote: > On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 10:10 -0400, Lee Revell wrote: > > On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 08:10 +0100, anahata wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 10:52:02PM -0400, Lee Revell wrote: > > > > > > > Or just use 2.6. 2.6.11 OOTB has better latency than 2.4 with those > > > > patches. > > > > > > > > > > At last! Am I right in thinking that this is the first release of 2.6 of > > > which that's true? Time for an upgrade, as I see Debian's up to 2.6.11 now. > > > > 2.6.12 should be out within a week or two. And my tests with 2.6.12-rc1 > > show it's even better than 2.6.11. So if you're still on 2.4 you might > > want to wait. > > OK, so using 2.6.12 provides better latencies that 2.4.x with pre-empt + > lowlatency patches? > > Or do we still need to apply Ingo's patches to 2.6.12? > Judging from the release candidates, 2.6.12 should give you better latency than Windows or OSX OOTB. With Ingo's patches it's *much* better. If you don't need sub-millisecond latencies then 2.6.12 vanilla should work great. Lee
