Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 30 Dec 2001 15:12:03 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 30 Dec 2001 15:11:53 -0500 Received: from mail3.aracnet.com ([216.99.193.38]:8200 "EHLO mail3.aracnet.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 30 Dec 2001 15:11:40 -0500 From: "M. Edward Borasky" To: , Cc: Subject: RE: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 12:11:12 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-Reply-To: <3C2F18A5.B50792F0@sirius-cafe.de> Importance: Normal Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > My main "problem" with 2.4 as well. Using free memory for Cache/Buffers > is great, but only as long as the memory is not needed for running > tasks. As soon as a task is requesting more memory, it should be first > taken from Cache/Buffer (they are caches, aren't they :-). Only if this > has been used up (to a tunable minimum, see below), swapping and finally > OOM killing should happen. > > To prevent completely trashing IO performance, there should be tunable > parameters for minimum and maximum Cache/Buffer usage (lets say in > percent of total memory). Maybe those tunables are even there today and > I am just to stupid to find them :-)) Yes!! I second that motion!! On top of that, we need buffer/page cache hit rate statistics!! Once your read hit rate gets up into the high 90 percentages, more buffer/page cache memory is wasted. If Linux is to succeed in enterprise-level usage, we *must* have tools to measure, manage and tune performance -- in short, to do capacity planning like we do on any other system. And the kernel variables that affect performance *must* be under control of the system administrator and ultimately the machine's *customers*, *not* a bunch of kernel geeks! That means keeping them in variables accessible by a system administrator, *not* #defines in code that must be entirely recompiled when you want to tweak a parameter. If you build it, they will come :). If you *refuse* to build it, they will use something else -- it's as simple as that. -- M. Edward Borasky znmeb@borasky-research.net http://www.borasky-research.net - 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/