[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: swap-prefetch: A smart way to make good use of idle resources (was: updatedb)
Chris Snook wrote:
> Al Boldi wrote:
> > IMHO, what everybody agrees on, is that swap-prefetch has a positive
> > effect in some cases, and nobody can prove an adverse effect (excluding
> > power consumption). The reason for this positive effect is also crystal
> > clear: It prefetches from swap on idle into free memory, ie: it doesn't
> > force anybody out, and they are the first to be dropped without further
> > swap-out, which sounds really smart.
> >
> > Conclusion: Either prove swap-prefetch is broken, or get this merged
> > quick.
> If you can't prove why it helps and doesn't hurt, then it's a hack, by
> definition.

Ok, slow down: swap-prefetch isn't a hack. It's a kernel-thread that adds
swap-prefetch functionality to the kernel.

> With swap prefetch, we're only optimizing the case when the box isn't
> loaded and there's RAM free, but we're not optimizing the case when the
> box is heavily loaded and we need for RAM to be free.

Exactly, swap-prefetch is very specific, and that's why it's so successful:
It does one thing, and it does that very well.

> I'm inclined to view swap prefetch as a successful scientific experiment,
> and use that data to inform a more reasoned engineering effort. If we can
> design something intelligent which happens to behave more or less like
> swap prefetch does under the circumstances where swap prefetch helps, and
> does something else smart under the circumstances where swap prefetch
> makes no discernable difference, it'll be a much bigger improvement.

Well, a swapless OS would really be the ultimate, but that's another thread
entirely (see thread: '[RFC] VM: I have a dream...')

Don't mistake swap-prefetch as trying to additionally fix swap-in slowdown,
and if it did, then that would be a hack, but it doesn't.

Instead, understand that swap-prefetch is viable even if all swapper issues
have been solved, because swapping implies pages being swapped in when
needed, and swap-prefetch smartly uses idle time to do so.

> Because we cannot prove why the existing patch helps, we cannot say what
> impact it will have when things like virtualization and solid state drives
> radically change the coefficients of the equation we have not solved.
> Providing a sysctl to turn off a misbehaving feature is a poor substitute
> for doing it right the first time, and leaving it off by default will
> ensure that it only gets used by the handful of people who know enough to
> rebuild with the patch anyway.

But we do know why it helps: a proc eats memory, then page-cache, then swaps
others out, and then dies to free its memory, and now swap-prefetch comes in
if the system is idle. Sounds really smart.

While many people may definitely benefit, others may just want to turn it
off. No harm done.


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: 2007-07-28 06:21    [W:0.090 / U:6.732 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site