From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Daniel Phillips Subject: Re: 2.5.35-mm1 Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 09:51:02 +0200 References: <3D858515.ED128C76@digeo.com> In-Reply-To: <3D858515.ED128C76@digeo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton , lkml , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net" List-ID: On Monday 16 September 2002 09:15, Andrew Morton wrote: > A 4x performance regression in heavy dbench testing has been fixed. The > VM was accidentally being fair to the dbench instances in page reclaim. > It's better to be unfair so just a few instances can get ahead and submit > more contiguous IO. It's a silly thing, but it's what I meant to do anyway. Curious... did the performance hit show anywhere other than dbench? -- Daniel -- 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/