Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261170AbVCQUwf (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:52:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261173AbVCQUwf (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:52:35 -0500 Received: from omx1-ext.sgi.com ([192.48.179.11]:9649 "EHLO omx1.americas.sgi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261170AbVCQUwa (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:52:30 -0500 Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 14:52:14 -0600 From: Robin Holt To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: akpm@osdl.org Subject: vm_dirty_ratio seems a bit large. Message-ID: <20050317205213.GC17353@lnx-holt.americas.sgi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1783 Lines: 38 Andrew, We have some fairly large installations that are running into long pauses while running fsync(). One of the issues that was noted is the vm_dirty_ratio, while probably adequate for a desktop type installation, seems excessively large for a larger configuration. For your reference, the machine that first reported this is running with 384GB of memory. Others that reported the problem range from 256GB to 4TB. At those sizes, we are talking dirty buffers in the range of 100GB to 1TB. That seems a bit excessive. Is there any chance of limiting vm_dirty_ratio to something other than a hard-coded 40%? Maybe add something like the following two lines to the beginning of page_writeback_init(). This would limit us to roughly 2GB of dirty buffers. I picked that number assuming that nobody would want to affect machines in the 4GB and below range. vm_dirty_ratio = min(40, TWO_GB_IN_PAGES / total_pages * 100); dirty_background_ratio = vm_dirty_ratio / 4; One other issue we have is the vm_dirty_ratio and background_ratio adjustments are a little coarse with these memory sizes. Since our minimum adjustment is 1%, we are adjusting by 40GB on the largest configuration from above. The hardware we are shipping today is capable of going to far greater amounts of memory, but we don't have customers demanding that yet. I would like to plan ahead for that and change vm_dirty_ratio from a straight percent into a millipercent (thousandth of a percent). Would that type of change be acceptable? Thanks, Robin Holt - 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/