[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 18:51 -0400, Daniel Hazelton wrote:

> Now, once more, I'm going to ask: What is so terribly wrong with swap
> prefetch? Why does it seem that everyone against it says "Its treating a
> symptom, so it can't go in"?

And once again, I personally have nothing against swap-prefetch, or
something like it. I can see how it or something like it could be made
to improve the lives of people who get up in the morning to find their
apps sitting on disk due to memory pressure generated by over-night
system maintenance operations.

The author himself however, says his implementation can't help with
updatedb (though people seem to be saying that it does), or anything
else that leaves memory full. That IMHO, makes it of questionable value
toward solving what people are saying they want swap-prefetch for in the
first place.

I personally don't care if swap-prefetch goes in or not.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2007-07-28 09:51    [W:0.297 / U:1.160 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site