Re: The performance and behaviour of the anti-fragmentation relatedpatches

[Andrew Morton]

On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 16:19:19 -0500
Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/