lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Sep]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [patch] vmfixes-2.4.0-test9-B2 - fixing deadlocks
From
Date
Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de> writes:

> Could you tell me what's wrong in having an app with a 1.5G mapped executable
> (or a tiny executable but with a 1.5G shared/private file mapping if you
> prefer),

O.K. that sound more reasonable. I was reading image as program
text... and a 1.5GB program text is a something I never have seen (and
hopefully will never see :-)

> 300M of shm (or 300M of anonymous memory if you prefer) and 200M as
> filesystem cache?

I don't really see a reason for fs cache in the application. I think
that parallel applications tend to either share mostly all or nothing,
but I may be wrong here.

> The application have a misc I/O load that in some part will run out
> of the working set, what's wrong with this?
>
> What's ridiculous? Please elaborate.

I think we fixed this misreading.

But still IMHO you underestimate the importance of shared memory for a
lot of applications in the high end. There is not only Oracle out
there and most of the shared memory is _not_ locked.

Greetings
Christoph
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:38    [W:0.374 / U:10.316 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site