![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Thu, 3 Jan 2002 23:26:01 -0600 Ken Brownfield <brownfld@irridia.com> 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 example). > Of course, I'm not biased or anything. ;-) How could you ? ;-)) Regards, Stephan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:15 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||