From: Rik van Riel <H.H.vanRiel@fys.ruu.nl>
To: Joe Fouche <jf@ugcs.caltech.edu>
Cc: linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH *] vhand-2.1.65b released
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 02:37:23 +0100 (MET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.91.971121023024.692A-100000@mirkwood.dummy.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19971120152522.39483@helix.caltech.edu>
On Thu, 20 Nov 1997, Joe Fouche wrote:
> You wrote
> > since so many people have found something wrong with vhand-2.1.6[45]
> > (particularly the CPU usage), I have implemented their ideas and
> > I've made the 'anti-fragmentation' unit even more agressive, since
> > some people still reported crashes because of memory fragmentation...
>
> This one (65b) is really good. I also found that I could decrease the numbers
> in /proc/sys/vm/freepages (I had them set kind of high) to improve all-around
> interactive performance.
All-round performance is improved, but mostly on small-memory
machines... We still need to do some tuning and optimization
for special cases of memory usage (linear, directory scanning,
etc..).
>
> root 3 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? SW< 11:34 0:00 (kswapd)
> root 4 1.0 0.0 0 0 ? SW 11:34 2:16 (vhand)
See, the CPU usage is way to high. It might be OK for a 32Meg
system, but imagine someone trying this on a 512Meg system :)
Actually, someone with a 512Meg system agreed to try my patch
this weekend. If things go well the patch might be ready for
integration in the mainstream kernel...
> A good way to test vhand, then, might be to make freepages really high and watch
> as things get swapped out. :)
More importantly, does the system remain stable with an ultra-low
value of freepages?
>
> Wonder if the kernel could tune freepages automatically, based on some measure
> of the performance of swap devices? Maybe the same thing would apply to some of
> the numbers in struct swap_control_v5?
But of course it could. Setting the value of min_free_pages to the
average nr of pagefaults we had during the last time (weighed after
time...) could result in a smaller number of freepages when we don't
need them, and increase the number of freepages when we need the
memory most. Hmm, I gotta try this one.
>
> Anyway, send it to Linus, it works great! :)
It works great for US, small-memory users. But there are also
those people around who have large (> 64M) memory systems. I
won't send it to Linus unless I know it works _flawlessly_ on
large-memory systems as well.
Rik.
----------
Send Linux memory-management wishes to me: I'm currently looking
for something to hack...
next parent reply other threads:[~1997-11-21 2:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <19971120152522.39483@helix.caltech.edu>
1997-11-21 1:37 ` Rik van Riel [this message]
1997-11-20 9:57 Rik van Riel
1997-11-20 22:54 ` Mathieu Guillaume
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=Pine.LNX.3.91.971121023024.692A-100000@mirkwood.dummy.home \
--to=h.h.vanriel@fys.ruu.nl \
--cc=jf@ugcs.caltech.edu \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
/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