On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > Mike Fedyk wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'll send you a patch which makes the VM less inclined to page things
> > > > out in the presence of heavy writes, and which decreases read
> > > > latencies.
> > > >
> > > Is this patch posted anywhere?
> >
> > I sent it yesterday, in this thread. Here it is again.
> >
> > Description:
> >
> > - Account for locked as well as dirty buffers when deciding
> > to throttle writers.
>
> Just one thing: If we have lots of locked buffers due to reads we are
> going to may unecessarily block writes, and thats not any good.
>
> But well, I prefer to fix interactivity than to care about that one kind
> of workload, so I'm ok with it.
>
> > - Tweak VM to make it work the inactive list harder, before starting
> > to evict pages or swap.
>
> I would like to see he interactivity problems get fixed on block layer
> side first: Its not a VM issue initially. Actually, the thing is that if
> you tweak VM this way you're going to break some workloads.
>
> > - Change the elevator so that once a request's latency has
> > expired, we can still perform merges in front of that
> > request. But we no longer will insert new requests in
> > front of that request.
>
> Sounds fine... I've received quite many success reports already, right ?
Err...
s/I/you/
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Nov 30 2001 - 21:00:32 EST