From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3905DFCF.B8695E16@mandrakesoft.com> Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 14:11:27 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: 2.3.x mem balancing References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: riel@nl.linux.org Cc: Linus Torvalds , Andrea Arcangeli , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: Rik van Riel wrote: > Another thing which we probably want before 2.4 is scanning > big processes more agressively than small processes. I've > implemented most of what is needed for that and it seems to > have a good influence on performance because: > - small processes suffer less from the presence of memory hogs > - memory hogs have their pages aged more agressively, making it > easier for them to do higher throughput from/to swap or disk Since you do not mention a new sysctl here... The change you propose is policy. Favoring interactivity over memory hogs is not always a good idea and should be left up to the sysadmin not kernel hacker to decide. Jeff -- Jeff Garzik | Nothing cures insomnia like the Building 1024 | realization that it's time to get up. MandrakeSoft, Inc. | -- random fortune -- 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/