Comment by quietbritishjim

If I've understood this article right (possibly not as it's not so clear):

* On single core machines the scheduler interval is quite fine grained to ensure responsiveness.

* As the number of cores grows, the scheduler interval increases (by default), presumably because there's greater cost to task switching across more cores and the greater number of cores inherently increases the responsiveness anyway.

* BUT – and this is the point of the article – above 8 cores, the scheduler interval remains constant rather than increasing further.

If I have read it right, then surely that's exactly what you want? If you have done enormously beefy server with hundreds of cores then you don't want a CPU bound task persisting for several seconds! You almost certainly have proportionally more tasks to run and need to keep that interval down. There's presumably also diminishing increases to the cost of switching across more cores (admittedly a logarithmically increasing interval, as mentioned in the article, world also cope with that). And, in any case, a huge server is more likely to have this sort of setting manually tuned.

If there is a bug here at all then it's a minor one, nothing like the title suggests.