Re: SWAP: Linux far behind Solaris or I missed something (fwd)

Rik van Riel (H.H.vanRiel@phys.uu.nl)
Fri, 4 Dec 1998 16:23:44 +0100 (CET)

On Fri, 4 Dec 1998, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Dec 1998 10:41:15 +0000, Neil Conway
> <nconway.list@ukaea.org.uk> said:
>
> >> (although the 2.1.130+my patch seems to work very well
> >> with extremely high swap throughput)
>
> > Since the poster didn't say otherwise, perhaps this test was performed
> > with buffermem/pagecache.min_percent set to their default values, which
> > IIRC add up to 13% of physical RAM (in fact that's PHYSICAL ram, not 13%
>
> I know. That's why relying on fixed margins to ensure good
> performance is wrong: the system really ought to be self-tuning.
> We may yet get it right for 2.2: there are people working on this.

It appears that 2.1.130 + my little patches only needs the
borrow percentage (otherwise kswapd doesn't have enough
reason to switch from the always-succesful swap_out()),
and that only needs to be set to a high value...
(ie. /not/ the braindead values that went into 2.1.131)

cheers,

Rik -- the flu hits, the flu hits, the flu hits -- MORE
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Linux memory management tour guide. H.H.vanRiel@phys.uu.nl |
| Scouting Vries cubscout leader. http://www.phys.uu.nl/~riel/ |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/