[lkml]   [2002]   [Jan]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable
    On Thu, 3 Jan 2002 23:26:01 -0600
    Ken Brownfield <> wrote:

    > On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 01:19:28AM +0100, Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:
    > | > A) VM has major issues
    > |
    > | On all boxes I run currently (all 1GB or below RAM), I cannot find
    > | _major_ issues.
    > Yeah, I'm seeing it primarily with 1-4GB, though I have very few <1GB
    > machines in production.

    Ok. It would be really nice to know if the -aa patches do any good at your
    configs. Andrea has possibly done something on the issue. But let me take this
    chance to state an open word: last time Andrea talked about his personal
    hardware I couldn't really believe it - because it was so ridiculously small. I
    wonder if anyone at SuSE management _does_ actually read this list and think
    about how someone can do a good job without good equipment. If you really want
    to do something groundbreaking about highmem you have to have a _box_. A box
    _somewhere_ in the world or a patch for highmem-in-lowmem is not really the
    same thing. Even Schumacher wouldn't have won formula one by sitting inside a
    Fiat Uno with a patched speedometer.

    > but I
    > do think the mindset behind the kernel needs to at least partially break
    > free of the grip of UP desktops, at least to the point of fixing issues
    > like I'm mentioning.
    > Not critical for me; but high-profile on lkml.

    You are right.

    > [...]
    > | > C) IO-APIC code that requires noapic on any and all SMP
    > | > machines that I've ever run on.
    > |
    > | I am currently running 5 Asus CUV4X-D based SMP boxes all with apic
    > | _on_, amongst which are squids, sql servers, workstation type setups
    > | (2 my very own).
    > Do they have *sustained* heavy hit/IRQ/IO load? For example, sending
    > 25Mbit and >1,000 connections/s of sustained small images traffic
    > through khttpd will kill 2.4 (slow loss of timer and eventual total
    > freeze) in a couple of hours. Trivially reproducable for me on SMP with
    > any amount of memory. On HP, Tyan, Intel, Asus... etc.

    Hm, I have about 24GB of NFS traffic every day, which may be too less. What
    exactly are you seeing in this case (logfiles etc.)?

    > It's not that the kernel is bad, it's that there are specific things
    > that shouldn't be forgotten because of a "the kernel is good"
    > evaluation.

    Hopefully nobody does this here, I don't.

    > Like I said, I suspect that most people with machines in lower-load
    > environments don't have these issues, but "number of people effected" is
    > only one metric to judge the importance of an issue.

    The number of people is not really interesting for me, as the boxes get bigger
    every day it is only a matter of time to see more people with lots of GB (as an

    > Of course, I'm not biased or anything. ;-)

    How could you ? ;-))


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:15    [W:0.028 / U:2.348 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site