[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:0.024 / U:2.012 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site