Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763612AbXIKMRh (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Sep 2007 08:17:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752259AbXIKMR1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Sep 2007 08:17:27 -0400 Received: from lazybastard.de ([212.112.238.170]:59174 "EHLO longford.lazybastard.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752791AbXIKMRZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Sep 2007 08:17:25 -0400 Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 14:12:26 +0200 From: =?utf-8?B?SsO2cm4=?= Engel To: Nick Piggin Cc: Christoph Lameter , andrea@suse.de, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , Mel Gorman , William Lee Irwin III , David Chinner , Jens Axboe , Badari Pulavarty , Maxim Levitsky , Fengguang Wu , swin wang , totty.lu@gmail.com, hugh@veritas.com Subject: Re: [00/41] Large Blocksize Support V7 (adds memmap support) Message-ID: <20070911121225.GE13132@lazybastard.org> References: <20070911060349.993975297@sgi.com> <200709110452.20363.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <200709110452.20363.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2159 Lines: 43 On Tue, 11 September 2007 04:52:19 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > On Tuesday 11 September 2007 16:03, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > > 5. VM scalability > > Large block sizes mean less state keeping for the information being > > transferred. For a 1TB file one needs to handle 256 million page > > structs in the VM if one uses 4k page size. A 64k page size reduces > > that amount to 16 million. If the limitation in existing filesystems > > are removed then even higher reductions become possible. For very > > large files like that a page size of 2 MB may be beneficial which > > will reduce the number of page struct to handle to 512k. The variable > > nature of the block size means that the size can be tuned at file > > system creation time for the anticipated needs on a volume. > > The idea that there even _is_ a bug to fail when higher order pages > cannot be allocated was also brushed aside by some people at the > vm/fs summit. I don't know if those people had gone through the > math about this, but it goes somewhat like this: if you use a 64K > page size, you can "run out of memory" with 93% of your pages free. > If you use a 2MB page size, you can fail with 99.8% of your pages > still free. That's 64GB of memory used on a 32TB Altix. While I agree with your concern, those numbers are quite silly. The chances of 99.8% of pages being free and the remaining 0.2% being perfectly spread across all 2MB large_pages are lower than those of SHA1 creating a collision. I don't see anyone abandoning git or rsync, so your extreme example clearly is the wrong one. Again, I agree with your concern, even though your example makes it look silly. Jörn -- You can't tell where a program is going to spend its time. Bottlenecks occur in surprising places, so don't try to second guess and put in a speed hack until you've proven that's where the bottleneck is. -- Rob Pike - 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/