Messages in this thread | | | From | Con Kolivas <> | Subject | Re: Autotune swappiness01 | Date | Tue, 27 Jul 2004 08:58:41 +1000 |
| |
Andrew Morton writes:
> Joel Becker <Joel.Becker@oracle.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jul 26, 2004 at 10:43:01AM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote: >> > Low memory boxes and ones that are heavily laden with applications find >> > that ends up making things slow down trying to keep all applications in >> > physical ram. >> >> Lowish memory boxes with plain desktop loads find that the default >> of '60' is a terrible one (I'm speaking of 1GHz-ish machines with 256MB >> (like mine) or 512MB (like a guy next to me)). Every person I know who >> installs 2.6 complains about how it feels slow and choppy. I tell them >> "The first thing I do after installing 2.6 is set swappiness to '20'." >> Sure enough, they set swappiness to 20 and their box starts behaving >> like a properly tuned one. >> I don't know what workload the default of '60' is for, but for >> the (128MB < x < 1GB) of RAM case, it sucks (and I've seen the same >> behavior on a 300MHz 196MB box). >> > > Yes, I think 60% is about right for a 512-768M box. Too high for the > smaller machines, too low for the larger ones.
Sigh..
I have a 1Gb desktop machine that refuses to keep my applications in ram overnight if I have a swappiness higher than the default so I think lots of desktop users with more ram will be unhappy with higher settings.
> More intelligent selection of the initial value is needed.
Perhaps, but I really doubt desktop users running mainline would be happy about it going significantly higher.
Cheers, Con
- 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/
| |