lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Mar]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: The performance and behaviour of the anti-fragmentation related patches
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 16:19:19 -0500
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> wrote:

> Bill Irwin wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 01:23:28PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
> >> With 32 CPUs diving into the page reclaim simultaneously,
> >> each trying to scan a fraction of memory, this is disastrous
> >> for performance. A 256GB system should be even worse.
> >
> > Thundering herds of a sort pounding the LRU locks from direct reclaim
> > have set off the NMI oopser for users here.
>
> Ditto here.

Opterons?

> The main reason they end up pounding the LRU locks is the
> swappiness heuristic. They scan too much before deciding
> that it would be a good idea to actually swap something
> out, and with 32 CPUs doing such scanning simultaneously...

What kernel version?
-
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: 2007-03-02 22:57    [W:0.084 / U:0.636 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site