Final answer:
First-come-first-serve (FCFS) scheduling can lead to inefficiencies when long processes are served before shorter ones, causing increased wait times and poor resource utilization. However, it performs better when the queue is dominated by short processes as they are completed quickly, improving overall system performance.
Step-by-step explanation:
The assertion that First-come-first-serve (FCFS) performs much better for short processes than long ones relates directly to the field of operating system scheduling. FCFS is one of the simplest types of CPU scheduling algorithms, where processes are attended to in the order they arrive with no preemption. This means that once a process starts running, it continues until it's complete without being interrupted by other processes.
In the context of short and long processes, FCFS can be inefficient for long processes because if a long process is at the front of the queue, it holds the CPU until it completes, causing the shorter processes behind it to wait. This scenario could lead to the convoy effect, where a group of relatively short processes are behind a long one, resulting in poor resource utilization and increased average waiting time for processes. Conversely, if many short jobs are queued first, they will complete quickly, leading to a more efficient performance regarding average response and turnaround times.