Messages in this thread |  | | From | "DICKENS,CARY (HP-Loveland,ex2)" <> | Subject | RE: major VM with 2.4.10pre12 and 2.4.10pre13 and highmem, we w ill help test | Date | Fri, 21 Sep 2001 14:48:18 -0700 |
| |
Rik,
I'm working with Erik and need to know which of the 3 patches ( or all ) that you want data for. We are setting up the plain test right now.
aging aging+launder aging2launder
Cary
> -----Original Message----- > From: HABBINGA,ERIK (HP-Loveland,ex1) > Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 3:10 PM > To: DICKENS,CARY (HP-Loveland,ex2) > Subject: FW: major VM suckage with 2.4.10pre12 and 2.4.10pre13 and > highmem, we will help test > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Rik van Riel [mailto:riel@conectiva.com.br] > Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 3:01 PM > To: HABBINGA,ERIK (HP-Loveland,ex1) > Cc: 'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org' > Subject: Re: major VM suckage with 2.4.10pre12 and 2.4.10pre13 and > highmem, we will help test > > > On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, HABBINGA,ERIK (HP-Loveland,ex1) wrote: > > > Kernel 2.4.10pre13 did not help our NFS SPEC testing on a > machine with > > 4GB RAM. Refer to my previous message about those results: > > http://lists.insecure.org/linux-kernel/2001/Sep/3036.html > > > > In a nutshell, kswapd starts grabbing 99% of the CPU for long > > stretches in time, which causes us to drop NFS RPC > connections, which > > causes performance to suck. > > I'm curious, how do recent -ac kernels perform here ? > > If you have the time, could you test 2.4.9-ac13 plain > and 2.4.9-ac13 with my page aging and launder patches > from http://www.surriel.com/patches/ ? ;) > > cheers, > > Rik > -- > IA64: a worthy successor to i860. > > http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ > > Send all your spam to aardvark@nl.linux.org (spam digging piggy) > - 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/
|  |