Messages in this thread |  | | | From | Ben Gamari <> | | Subject | Re: fadvise DONTNEED implementation (or lack thereof) | | Date | Sun, 14 Nov 2010 00:20:57 -0500 |
| |
On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 14:09:29 +0900 (JST), KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote: > Because we have an alternative solution already. please try memcgroup :) > Alright, fair enough. It still seems like there are many cases where fadvise seems more appropriate, but memcg should at least satisfy my personal needs so I'll shut up now. Thanks!
- Ben
|  |