Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: 2.1.89 broken? | From | (Trond Eivind Glomsrød) | Date | 10 Mar 1998 10:25:06 +0100 |
| |
Rik van Riel <H.H.vanRiel@fys.ruu.nl> writes:
> On 10 Mar 1998, Trond Eivind =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Glomsr=F8d?= wrote: > > Scott Lampert <fortunato@heavymetal.org> writes: > > > It works for me on my 233MMX, however it seems to be far > > > less efficient than prior kernels when it comes to memory handling. > > > It doesn't seem to want to give up much memory from the disk cache, > > > prefering to stick stuff in swap first. > > > > That is my experience as well... I've got 80 MB. It was happy with > > about 56 MB for caches, 4 MB free and a little less than 20 MB > > used. Oh - and 75 MB used swap. > > You both seem to be ignoring the fact that sticking > unused stuff in swap is better than freeing disk > cache pages.
I am of the belief that having almost 60 MB disk cache on a 60 MBworkstation is a bit of an overkill...
> In 2.1.89 we age disk cache pages in > much the same way we age private (in-swap) pages. > Because the aging is the same, you can be quite sure > that Linux is doing the right thing... > > (and I haven't heard you about worse performance either)
OK - the performance is worse for me (I thought that was implicit, given the huge swap) since it spends much time swapping - during which it is utterly irresponsive.
-- Trond Eivind Glomsrød http://s9412a.steinan.ntnu.no/~teg/ ** teg@pvv.ntnu.no
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
| |