Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 06 Mar 2013 02:22:50 -0800 | From | Howard Chu <> | Subject | Re: mmap vs fs cache |
| |
Howard Chu wrote: > Howard Chu wrote: >> Howard Chu wrote: >>> 2 questions: >>> why is there data in the FS cache that isn't owned by (the mmap of) the >>> process that caused it to be paged in in the first place? >>> is there a tunable knob to discourage the page cache from stealing from the >>> process? >> >> This Unmapped page cache control http://lwn.net/Articles/436010/ sounds like >> it might have been helpful here. I.e., having a way to prioritize so that >> unmapped cache pages get reclaimed in preference to mapped pages could help. >> Though I still don't understand why these pages in the cache aren't mapped in >> the first place. >> > As implied by this post > http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0701.3/0354.html setting > swappiness to 0 seems to give the desired effect of preventing mapped pages > from being reclaimed.
I spoke too soon, after a few minutes of load the process size started shrinking again. My original questions still stand.
-- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
| |