linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@redhat.com>
To: Yannis Smaragdakis <yannis@cc.gatech.edu>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>,
	"Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@redhat.com>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo@conectiva.com.br>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>, Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com>,
	Derek Martin <derek@cerberus.ne.mediaone.net>,
	davem@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.2.17pre7 VM enhancement Re: I/O performance on
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 10:28:11 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20000717102811.D5127@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200007170709.DAA27512@ocelot.cc.gatech.edu>; from yannis@cc.gatech.edu on Mon, Jul 17, 2000 at 03:09:06AM -0400

Hi,

On Mon, Jul 17, 2000 at 03:09:06AM -0400, Yannis Smaragdakis wrote:

> Although I agree with Rik in many major points, I disagree in that I
> don't think that page aging should be frequency-based. Overall, I strongly
> believe that frequency is the wrong thing to be measuring for deciding
> which page to evict from RAM. The reason is that a page that is brought
> to memory and touched 1000 times in relatively quick succession is *not*
> more valuable than one that is brought to memory and only touched once. 
> Both will cause exactly one page fault.

Not when you are swapping.  A page which is likely to be touched again
in the future will cause further page faults if we evict it.  A page
which isn't going to be touched again can be evicted without that
penalty.  The past behaviour is only useful in as much as it provides
a way of guessing future behaviour, and we want to make sure that we
evict those pages least likely to be touched again in the near future.
Access frequency *is* a credible way of assessing that, as there are
many common access patterns in which a large volume of data is
accessed exactly once --- LRU breaks down completely in that case, LFU
does not.

> Also, one should be cautious of
> pages that are brought in RAM, touched many times, but then stay untouched
> for a long time. Frequency should never outweigh recency--the latter is
> a better predictor, as OS designers have found since the early 70s.

No, they have not.  Look at the literature and you will see that OS
designers keep peppering their code with large numbers of special
cases to cope with the fact that LRU breaks down on large sequential
accesses.  FreeBSD, which uses a LFU-based design, needs no such
special cases.

> Having said that, LRU is certainly broken, but there are other ways to
> fix it.

Right.  LFU is just one way of fixing LRU.

--Stephen
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/

  reply	other threads:[~2000-07-17  9:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20000629114407.A3914@redhat.com>
     [not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.21.0006291330520.1713-100000@inspiron.random>
2000-06-29 13:00   ` [PATCH] 2.2.17pre7 VM enhancement Re: I/O performance on 2.4.0-test2 Stephen C. Tweedie
2000-07-06 10:35     ` Andrea Arcangeli
2000-07-06 13:29       ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2000-07-09 17:11         ` Swap clustering with new VM Marcelo Tosatti
2000-07-09 20:53           ` Andrea Arcangeli
2000-07-11  9:36             ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2000-07-09 20:31         ` [PATCH] 2.2.17pre7 VM enhancement Re: I/O performance on 2.4.0-test2 Andrea Arcangeli
2000-07-11 11:50           ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2000-07-11 16:17             ` Andrea Arcangeli
2000-07-11 16:36               ` Juan J. Quintela
2000-07-11 17:33                 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2000-07-11 17:45                   ` Rik van Riel
2000-07-11 17:54                     ` Andrea Arcangeli
2000-07-11 18:03                       ` Juan J. Quintela
2000-07-11 19:32                         ` Andrea Arcangeli
2000-07-12  0:05                           ` John Alvord
2000-07-12  0:52                             ` Andrea Arcangeli
2000-07-12 18:02                             ` Rik van Riel
2000-07-14  8:51               ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2000-07-11 17:32           ` Rik van Riel
2000-07-11 17:41             ` Andrea Arcangeli
2000-07-11 17:47               ` Rik van Riel
2000-07-11 18:00                 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2000-07-11 18:06                   ` Rik van Riel
2000-07-17  7:09                     ` [PATCH] 2.2.17pre7 VM enhancement Re: I/O performance on Yannis Smaragdakis
2000-07-17  9:28                       ` Stephen C. Tweedie [this message]
2000-07-17 13:01                         ` James Manning
2000-07-17 14:32                           ` Scott F. Kaplan
2000-07-17 14:53                         ` Rik van Riel
2000-07-17 16:44                           ` Manfred Spraul
2000-07-17 17:02                             ` Rik van Riel
2000-07-17 18:55                           ` Yannis Smaragdakis
2000-07-17 19:57                           ` John Fremlin
2000-07-17 14:46                       ` Alan Cox
2000-07-17 14:55                         ` Scott F. Kaplan
2000-07-17 15:31                           ` Rik van Riel
2000-07-14  9:01                   ` [PATCH] 2.2.17pre7 VM enhancement Re: I/O performance on 2.4.0-test2 Stephen C. Tweedie
2000-07-11 18:13               ` Juan J. Quintela
2000-07-11 20:57                 ` Roger Larsson
2000-07-11 22:49                   ` Juan J. Quintela
2000-07-12 16:01               ` Kev
2000-07-06 13:54       ` [PATCH] 2.2.17pre7 VM enhancement Re: I/O performance on2.4.0-test2 Roman Zippel

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20000717102811.D5127@redhat.com \
    --to=sct@redhat.com \
    --cc=alan@redhat.com \
    --cc=andrea@suse.de \
    --cc=axboe@suse.de \
    --cc=davem@redhat.com \
    --cc=derek@cerberus.ne.mediaone.net \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=marcelo@conectiva.com.br \
    --cc=riel@conectiva.com.br \
    --cc=yannis@cc.gatech.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox