Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:17:11 +0100 (CET) | | From | Mike Galbraith <> | | Subject | Re: 2.4.16 memory badness (fixed?) |
| |
On Sun, 9 Dec 2001, Leigh Orf wrote:
> In a personal email, Mike Galbraith wrote to me: > > | On Sat, 8 Dec 2001, Leigh Orf wrote: > | > | > inode_cache 439584 439586 512 62798 62798 1 > | > dentry_cache 454136 454200 128 15140 15140 1 > | > | I'd try moving shrink_[id]cache_memory to the very top of vmscan.c::shrink_caches. > | > | -Mike > > Mike, > > I tried what you suggested starting with a stock 2.4.16 kernel, and it > did fix the problem with 2.4.16 ENOMEM being returned. > > Now with that change and after updatedb runs, here's what the memory > situation looks like. Note inode_cache and dentry_cache are almost > nothing. Dunno if that's a good thing or not, but I'd definitely
Almost nothing isn't particularly good after updatedb ;-)
> consider this for a patch.
No, but those do need faster pruning imho. The growth rate can be really really fast at times.
-Mike
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |