From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 21:04:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Rik van Riel Subject: Re: Benchmarks to exploit LRU deficiencies In-Reply-To: <200510110213.29937.ak@suse.de> Message-ID: References: <20051010184636.GA15415@logos.cnet> <200510110213.29937.ak@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andi Kleen Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , linux-mm@kvack.org, sjiang@lanl.gov, rni@andrew.cmu.edu, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl List-ID: On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, Andi Kleen wrote: > I think if you want to really see advantages you should not implement > the advanced algorithms for the page cache, I suspect the page cache really wants it too, especially for database workloads. > but for the inode/dentry cache. We seem to have far more problems in > this area than with the standard page cache. However, I agree with you that the inode/dentry cache probably needs it more on file and web server workloads. The page cache getting invalidated whole inodes at a time, even when the inode is getting referenced frequently, could be a performance problem on some systems. -- All Rights Reversed -- 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