Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1422711AbWHSQx6 (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Aug 2006 12:53:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1422716AbWHSQx5 (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Aug 2006 12:53:57 -0400 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.180]:54735 "EHLO py-out-1112.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1422712AbWHSQxz (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Aug 2006 12:53:55 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=MPpNhi7EbZUCrBM8NlXaA2f1ykU48PqzhogTM9RlVp//eVvWBPnXlGOS11gPOaD25tXu3caLf7XCWI7Yh8h1vwpbm6Vgr56w2GEik8oWA7GJ2HFlYqOK4h/tOoVtgeSvqhnnB2QdYttKavp5AJxje7ujEXg7ksNJ6EVaVaoMAKY= Message-ID: <2c0942db0608190953r71ad8716vc2d11d9366894e40@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 09:53:54 -0700 From: "Ray Lee" Reply-To: ray-gmail@madrabbit.org To: "Andrew Morton" Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/9] deadlock prevention core Cc: "Daniel Phillips" , "Peter Zijlstra" , "David Miller" , riel@redhat.com, tgraf@suug.ch, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, "Mike Christie" In-Reply-To: <20060818194435.25bacee0.akpm@osdl.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060808211731.GR14627@postel.suug.ch> <20060813215853.0ed0e973.akpm@osdl.org> <44E3E964.8010602@google.com> <20060816225726.3622cab1.akpm@osdl.org> <44E5015D.80606@google.com> <20060817230556.7d16498e.akpm@osdl.org> <44E62F7F.7010901@google.com> <20060818153455.2a3f2bcb.akpm@osdl.org> <44E650C1.80608@google.com> <20060818194435.25bacee0.akpm@osdl.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1243 Lines: 26 On 8/18/06, Andrew Morton wrote: > I assert that this can be solved by putting swap on local disks. Peter > asserts that this isn't acceptable due to disk unreliability. I point > out that local disk reliability can be increased via MD, all goes quiet. > > A good exposition which helps us to understand whether and why a > significant proportion of the target user base still wishes to do > swap-over-network would be useful. Adding a hard drive adds $low per system, another failure point, and more importantly ~3-10 Watts which then has to be paid for twice (once to power it, again to cool it). For a hundred seats, that's significant. For 500, it's ranging toward fully painful. I'm in the process of designing the next upgrade for a VoIP call center, and we want to go entirely diskless in the agent systems. We'd also rather not swap over the network, but 'swap is as swap does.' That said, it in no way invalidates using /proc/sys/vm/min_free_kbytes... Ray - 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/