[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Which is better at vm, and why? 2.2 or 2.4
On Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 09:05:29PM -0400, Robert Love wrote:
> On Fri, 2001-10-19 at 20:38, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > Keep in mind that once you start exposing tuning parameters you tend to get
> > lots of user programs out there that break without the parameters, or if the
> > parameters don't behave the same way across versions. Official tuning
> > parameters also get in the way of trying out new algorithms, which might not
> > even support the old tweaks, for example.
> Agreed. They also encourage people to write algorithms that are
> suboptimal, but perform OK with proper tuning. This, imho, is the
> biggest argument against.

How does this differ when the tuning is hard coded?

There are always cases where the algo will fall over.

One thing I can say in favor of hard coded tuning is that it encourages the
cases where it does fall over to be reported, and possibly fixed.
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: 2005-03-22 13:18    [W:0.056 / U:0.784 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site