[lkml]   [2001]   [Jan]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] dcache 2nd chance replacement
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 01:00:28PM -0200, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > Other tasks tend not to stress the dcache like updatedb does,
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > leading to the effect that updatedb can "flush out" the other
> > cached values faster than the other processes reference them.
> >
> > This is something no amount of 2nd chance replacement or even
> > aging can prevent.
> Your arguments are senseless.

I could say the same of yours if I let myself
sink to that level ;) </obflamebait>

> The dcache aging is mostly useful with _high_ VFS load like
> updatedb in background. The logic is the same of the VM aging
> (ask yourself when the VM aging is most useful: when there's
> high VM load, like a `cp /dev/zero .`

This is exactly the point where page aging alone isn't good
enough and you need something like drop-behind...

(yes, there IS a reason why we have drop_behind() and page
deactivation in generic_file_write)


Hollywood goes for world dumbination,
Trailer at 11.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:52    [W:0.043 / U:0.040 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site