From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-f200.google.com (mail-qk0-f200.google.com [209.85.220.200]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30D716B025E for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2016 04:16:21 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-qk0-f200.google.com with SMTP id x190so260048346qkb.5 for ; Mon, 05 Dec 2016 01:16:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qt0-x22f.google.com (mail-qt0-x22f.google.com. [2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22f]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i7si8463682qtf.245.2016.12.05.01.16.20 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 05 Dec 2016 01:16:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qt0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id c47so307909983qtc.2 for ; Mon, 05 Dec 2016 01:16:20 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20161205070519.GA30765@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20161205070519.GA30765@dhcp22.suse.cz> From: Raymond Jennings Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 01:15:39 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Silly question about dethrottling Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113f4d72a375d00542e5bd32 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: Linux Memory Management List --001a113f4d72a375d00542e5bd32 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 11:05 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Sun 04-12-16 13:56:54, Raymond Jennings wrote: > > I have an application that is generating HUGE amounts of dirty data. > > Multiple GiB worth, and I'd like to allow it to fill at least half of my > > RAM. > > Could you be more specific why and what kind of problem you are trying > to solve? > > > I already have /proc/sys/vm/dirty_ratio pegged at 80 and the background > one > > pegged at 50. RAM is 32GiB. > > There is also dirty_bytes alternative which is an absolute numer. > How does this compare to setting dirty_ratio to a high percentage? > > > it appears to be butting heads with clean memory. How do I tell my > system > > to prefer using RAM to soak up writes instead of caching? > > I am not sure I understand. Could you be more specific about what is the > actual problem? Is it possible that your dirty data is already being > flushed and that is wy you see a clean cache? > What I'm wanting is for my writing process not to get throttled, even when the dirty memory it starts creating starts hogging memory the system would rather use for cache. --001a113f4d72a375d00542e5bd32 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On S= un, Dec 4, 2016 at 11:05 PM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
On Sun 04-12-16= 13:56:54, Raymond Jennings wrote:
> I have an application that is generating HUGE amounts of dirty data. > Multiple GiB worth, and I'd like to allow it to fill at least half= of my
> RAM.

Could you be more specific why and what kind of problem you are tryi= ng
to solve?

> I already have /proc/sys/vm/dirty_ratio pegged at 80 and the backgroun= d one
> pegged at 50.=C2=A0 RAM is 32GiB.

There is also dirty_bytes alternative which is an absolute numer.

How does this compare to setting dirty_ra= tio to a high percentage?=C2=A0

> it appears to be butting heads with clean memory.=C2=A0 How do I tell = my system
> to prefer using RAM to soak up writes instead of caching?

I am not sure I understand. Could you be more specific about what is= the
actual problem? Is it possible that your dirty data is already being
flushed and that is wy you see a clean cache?

What I'm wanting is for my writing process not to get throttled,= even when the dirty memory it starts creating starts hogging memory the sy= stem would rather use for cache.

--001a113f4d72a375d00542e5bd32-- -- 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: email@kvack.org