From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 14:32:41 +0200 (CEST) From: Andrea Arcangeli Subject: Re: filecache/swapcache questions [RFC] [RFT] [PATCH] kanoj-mm12-2.3.8 In-Reply-To: <14200.46476.994769.970340@dukat.scot.redhat.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: "Stephen C. Tweedie" Cc: Chuck Lever , Kanoj Sarcar , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, 29 Jun 1999, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote: >Absolutely. The important thing is to do enough swapping to make sure >that unused data is not kicking around in memory. Maybe you don't want I know that sometime is the right thing do to. But think also a difference scenario. You have a machine that only reads all the time from a disk 10giga of data in loop. The data is so big and you reference it so in round-robin that you have no chance to find one bit of data in in the page-cache (but don't tell me to not use a lru-algorithm :). So what you gain? You find most of your task swapped out: when you click netscape on the other desktop you find yourself stalled. Then you change desktop, the program continue to read from disk in background, and then you find stalled again the next time. In this case you gain _nothing_ from swapping out netscape. So I think we should make the swapout level to be at least configurable. Andrea -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://humbolt.geo.uu.nl/Linux-MM/