lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]   [less markup]   [headers]   [forward]  
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateFri, 30 Apr 2004 16:34:52 +1000
FromNick Piggin <>
SubjectRe: ~500 megs cached yet 2.6.5 goes into swap hell
Tim Connors wrote:
> Horst von Brand <vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl> said on Thu, 29 Apr 2004 16:01:11 -0400:
> 
>>Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> said:
>>
>>[...]
>>
>>
>>>I don't know. What if you have some huge application that only
>>>runs once per day for 10 minutes? Do you want it to be consuming
>>>100MB of your memory for the other 23 hours and 50 minutes for
>>>no good reason?
>>
>>How on earth is the kernel supposed to know that for this one particular
>>job you don't care if it takes 3 hours instead of 10 minutes, just because
>>you don't want to spare enough preciousss RAM?
> 
> 
> Note that we are not talking about having insufficient memory. In my
> case (2.4 kernel - ie, 2.6 with swapiness 0%) there is more than
> enough memory to contain all my working set - it's only because cache
> is too eager to claim memory that is otherwise in use that
> non-optimalities occur.
> 

Well depends on what you mean by working set.

In our memory manager, there is a point where often used
"file cache" (ie. unmapped cache) is considered preferable
to unused or little used "application memory" (mapped
memory).

There will be a point where even the most swap phobic desktop
users will want to start swapping.

I missed the description of your exact problem... was it in
this thread somewhere? Testing 2.6 would be appreciated if
possible too.
-
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 13:02    [W:0.531 / U:0.990 seconds]
©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans