[LAU] Basic question about use of a lowlatency kernel

[Kaj Ailomaa]

On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 21:57:22 +0100, Paul Davis  
<paul at linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 3:36 PM, <jonetsu at teksavvy.com> wrote:
>
>> If a better response time from the kernel is something that's Good, why
>> isn't lowlatency kernels a default in Linux distros (well, at least in
>> Linux Mint and Fedora)  If it is So Good, what are the arguments for not
>> having a lowlatency kernel by default ?
>>
>
> latency and bandwidth are opposing goals. server oriented  (compute-based
> or storage-based) systems want to have the highest possible bandwidth,  
> not
> the lowest latency. generally, at least.

 From what I hear, the throughput of for example linux-lowlatency on Ubuntu  
is 10% less than with linux-generic. So, that would be bad for servers in  
deed.
Also, it is said to use more battery power, but I have not seen any data  
on both of these things, so I really have no sources on that.
I do know that kernel developers in Ubuntu aren't interested in using  
-lowlatency configs over -generic ones for these sort of reasons.