From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 09:17:10 -0400 From: Benjamin LaHaise Subject: Re: [rfc] lockless pagecache Message-ID: <20050627131710.GC13945@kvack.org> References: <42BF9CD1.2030102@yahoo.com.au> <20050627004624.53f0415e.akpm@osdl.org> <42BFB287.5060104@yahoo.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42BFB287.5060104@yahoo.com.au> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nick Piggin Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 06:02:15PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > However I think for Oracle and others that use shared memory like > this, they are probably not doing linear access, so that would be a > net loss. I'm not completely sure (I don't have access to real loads > at the moment), but I would have thought those guys would have looked > into fault ahead if it were a possibility. Shared memory overhead doesn't show up on any of the database benchmarks I've seen, as they tend to use huge pages that are locked in memory, and thus don't tend to access the page cache at all after ramp up. -ben -- "Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once." -- John Wheeler -- 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-mm.org/ . Don't email: aart@kvack.org