lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Jul]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Autotune swappiness01
Con Kolivas wrote:
> Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>> Con Kolivas wrote:

>>> In my ideal, nonsensical, impossible to obtain world we have an
>>> autoregulating operating system that doesn't need any knobs.
>>>
>>
>> Some thinks are fundamental tradeoffs that can't be autotuned.
>>
>> Latency vs throughput comes up in a lot of places, eg. timeslices.
>>
>> Maximum throughput via effective use of swap, versus swapping as
>> a last resort may be another.
>
>
> As I said... it was ideal, nonsensical, and impossible. Doesn't sound
> like you're arguing with me.

No, you're right. My ideal operating system knows what the user
wants too ;)

Most of the time though, you are right. The quality/desirability of an
implementation will be inversely proportional to the number of knobs
sticking out of it (with bonus points for those that are meaningful to
2 people on the planet).

And yes, I think one knob should be enough for swapping behaviour 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 14:04    [W:0.407 / U:0.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site