Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932363AbWEBEVm (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 May 2006 00:21:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932366AbWEBEVm (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 May 2006 00:21:42 -0400 Received: from wilma.widomaker.com ([204.17.220.5]:11271 "EHLO wilma.widomaker.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932363AbWEBEVl (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 May 2006 00:21:41 -0400 Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 00:21:08 -0400 From: Charles Shannon Hendrix To: Linux Kernel Subject: Re: OOM kills if swappiness set to 0, swap storms otherwise Message-ID: <20060502042108.GD5691@widomaker.com> References: <1143510828.1792.353.camel@mindpipe> <20060327195905.7f666cb5.akpm@osdl.org> <20060405144716.GA10353@widomaker.com> <443B69BE.6060601@tlinx.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <443B69BE.6060601@tlinx.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1920 Lines: 48 Tue, 11 Apr 2006 @ 01:33 -0700, Linda Walsh said: > Hmmm, not to be contrary, but I have a 1GB system that refuses to swap > during large file i/o operations. For the first time in a *long* time, > I read someone's suggestion to increase swappiness -- I did, to 75 or 80, > (I've booted since then, so it's back to 60 and no swap usage) and some of > the programs that rarely run actually swapped. It was great! I finally had > more memory for file i/o operations. It's great if you actually need the file data that gets stored. > Maybe you are telling the system to "feel free" to use swap by having a > large swap file? I don't believe that matters, and certainly doesn't seem to affect my own system. If I use a smaller swap file, I just run out faster. Is your experience different? > I agree. Try getting rid of your swap file entirely -- your system > will still run unless you are overloading memory, but you have a Gig. > How much do you need to keep in memory? Sure, if/when I get a 4-way > CPU (I have a 2-cpu setup now), I might go up to 4G, but I might be > running multiple virtual machines too! Sure it will run, but I *want* swap to be used to remove unused programs. My current problem is that *useful* program code is being swapped out and being replaced by *useless* cached file data. > You might try the "cfq" block i/o algorithm. Then you can > ionice down the disk priority of background processes (though you need > to be root to reduce ionice levels at this point, unlike cpu nice). I've not seen ionice. -- shannon "AT" widomaker.com -- ["All of us get lost in the darkness, dreamers turn to look at the stars" -- Rush ] - 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/