From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sun, 13 Jun 1999 08:58:47 +0200 (CEST) From: Rik van Riel Subject: Re: process selection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrea Arcangeli Cc: Linux MM List-ID: On Sun, 13 Jun 1999, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Sat, 12 Jun 1999, Rik van Riel wrote: > > >Could it be an idea to take the 'sleeping time' of each > >process into account when selecting which process to swap > >out? Due to extreme lack of free time, I'm asking what > > The CPUs set the "accessed" bit in hardware, and that should be > enough to do proper aging. If setiathome is all in RAM it means it > gets touched more fast than netscape. Setiathome had been stopped (by loadwatch) for over an hour. This means that _everything_ else in the system could have been touched more often. Unfortunately, the kernel was still busy shrinking the page cache and the swapout counter was still with X and later with Netscape -- it didn't advance fast enough to get to setiathome, yet writing out my mailbox took so much disk activity in the limited buffer space that my mp3s began skipping. Rik -- Open Source: you deserve to be in control of your data. +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Le Reseau netwerksystemen BV: http://www.reseau.nl/ | | Linux Memory Management site: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/ | | Nederlandse Linux documentatie: http://www.nl.linux.org/ | +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm my@address' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://humbolt.geo.uu.nl/Linux-MM/