lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [May]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Linux 2.4.4-ac10
    On Fri, 18 May 2001, Rik van Riel wrote:

    > On Fri, 18 May 2001, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
    > > On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 07:44:39PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
    > >
    > > > This is the core of why we cannot (IMHO) have a discussion
    > > > of whether a patch introducing new VM tunables can go in:
    > > > there is no clear overview of exactly what would need to be
    > > > tunable and how it would help.
    > >
    > > It's worse than that. The workload on most typical systems is not
    > > static. The VM *must* be able to cope with dynamic workloads. You
    > > might twiddle all the knobs on your system to make your database run
    > > faster, but end up in such a situation that the next time a mail flood
    > > arrives for sendmail, the whole box locks up because the VM can no
    > > longer adapt.
    >
    > That's another problem, indeed ;)
    >
    > Ingo, Mike, please keep this in mind when designing
    > tunables or deciding which test you want to run today
    > in order to look how the VM is performing.

    I've bent your code up a bit. I've not yet been tempted to replace
    any of it with a knob ;-) There is a little piece I'd like to see
    thrown away though.. the loop in refill_inactive does nothing good.

    The test I prefer is a good one for the area of vm performance I'm
    most interested in. It doesn't cover the full vm spectrum by any
    means. I don't have a setup (any) good for testing mondo network or
    IO stuff. I test a simple 'job one size to large' scenario. Yes,
    it's limited test coverage.. it's still legitimate.

    Perhaps when you're evaluating vm performance, you should try my
    simple test once in a while. :) I'll bet you a bogobeer right here
    and now that when 2.4.5 hits the street you're going to be queried
    by the big-busy-box folks wrt swap volume.

    > Basic rule for VM: once you start swapping, you cannot
    > win; All you can do is make sure no situation loses
    > really badly and most situations perform reasonably.

    I disagree with that. I've seen a heavily swapping box run like
    a scaulded ass ape many times.

    Warsteiner,

    -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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:53    [W:0.025 / U:1.252 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site