I'm no expert, but I don't think this is true. Couldn't tasks arrive into the queue at the same rate that they are processed, resulting in a fixed queue size at 100% utilization?
Put another way, in the second "No good" diagram showing one task being worked on with none in the queue, another task could arrive before the current one is finished.
I suspect the counterargument might be that the task arrival rate is not usually that predictable, but even so, I expect that the amount of variance predicts how true this theory is in practice.
Put another way, in the second "No good" diagram showing one task being worked on with none in the queue, another task could arrive before the current one is finished.
I suspect the counterargument might be that the task arrival rate is not usually that predictable, but even so, I expect that the amount of variance predicts how true this theory is in practice.