lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Sep]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [OT] No Swap. Re: [BUG 2.6.90-test5] kernel shits itself with 48mb ram under moderate load
Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>>>Oh, it does matter. My workstation has 1 GB RAM and 2 GB swap and I hardly
>>>see any problems with paging <g>.
>>
>> Because your workload doesn't hit the 1GB limit.
>> Actually we just do not have fast enough I/O + CPU to utilize 1GB of
>>RAM efficiently.
>>
>> But if you will go into 128MB of RAM - you will see difference, where
>>should be no difference.
>>
>> Let's say (my personal exp.) cp'ing of kernel source with 0.5/0.25 GB
>>RAM dosn't differ. Aproximately the same time. 0.25GB little bit faster
>>- but it can be written off to noise. But try to do the same cp with
>>0.125GB - this cp (as of RH 2.4.20-20.9 +ext3 -swap) takes _*two*_ times
>>longer. Should it be?
>
> Yes, it should. If you have 0.25GB, it can be copied into cache. If you
> have 0.125GB, it doesn't fit there.
>

So you want to say to effectively copy (or whatever) 40GB harddrive I
have to have 40GB of RAM? Ridiculous.
Especially if copying is done in 4k lumps. (cp's default buffer)

<sarcasm flavour=sad> Hopefully not everyone shares your opinion. </sarcasm>

--
Ihar 'Philips' Filipau / with best regards from Saarbruecken.
--
"... and for $64000 question, could you get yourself vaguely
familiar with the notion of on-topic posting?"
-- Al Viro @ LKML

-
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 13:48    [W:0.067 / U:2.112 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site