[lkml]   [2006]   [Jul]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Improvement on memory subsystem
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 10:18:44 BST, Ian Stirling said:

> To paraphrase shakespear - all the world is not a P4 - and all the swap
> devices are not hard disks.

Been there, done that. I used to admin a net of Sun 3/50s where /dev/swap
was a symlink to a file on an NFS server, because the "shoebox" local hard
drives for those were so slow that throwing it across the ethernet to a
3/280 with Fujitsu Super-Eagles was faster...

> For example - I've got a 486/33 laptop with 12M RAM that I sometimes use
> , with swapping to a 128M PCMCIA RAM card that I got from somewhere.

If we go to the effort of writing code that tries to be smart about grouping
swap reads/writes by cost, it's easy enough to flag any sort of ram-disk device
as a 'zero seek time' device. Remember that I suggested making it dependent
on "how long until the next pass of the elevator" - for a ramdisk that basically
is zero, so the algorithm easily degenerates into "just queue the requests in
expected order you'll need the results".

> 20K instructions wasted on a device with no seek time is just annoying.

On the other hand, how long does it take to move a 4K page across the
PCMCIA interface? If you're seeing deep queues on it, you may *still*
want to optimize the order of requests...

[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-07-19 16:59    [W:0.048 / U:4.296 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site