• marcos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Yes, as long as you accept that the lower-priority tasks get dumped when needed.

    This is a common way to deal with it. But the number of managers that know how to decide a task is low-priority is exceedingly small. Most only have top-priority tasks to distribute to people.

    • OpenStars@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      Sigh… yes.

      Though the absolute best cluster systems I’ve seen have utilized this principle correctly, never leaving it idle, yet never blocking work that others want to do either (for more than a very small amount of time).

      Planning such takes a great deal of effort though, and most people seem to simply want to be paid and even more importantly than that feel in control, or perhaps worry that if they don’t rise up beyond their potential to handle matters that their own job won’t be quite as stable. Bc capitalism seems to fuck up everything it touches, more’s the pity.:-(

      img

      - image source