Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 7 Jan 2002 14:58:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 7 Jan 2002 14:58:09 -0500 Received: from garrincha.netbank.com.br ([200.203.199.88]:9483 "HELO netbank.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Mon, 7 Jan 2002 14:58:00 -0500 Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 17:57:30 -0200 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: To: Mark Hahn Cc: Pavel Machek , Linux Kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFT] simple deadline I/O scheduler In-Reply-To: Message-ID: X-spambait: aardvark@kernelnewbies.org X-spammeplease: aardvark@nl.linux.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 7 Jan 2002, Mark Hahn wrote: > > Would it be possible to introduce concept of I/O priority? I.e. I want > > updatedb not to load disk if I need it for something else? > > makes sense to me. actually, VM is another place where priority > could be quite useful - for instance, how hard the VM scavenges > a proc's pages. oops, there I go advocating a tunable... > > VM_SWAP_ME_HARDER anyone? This seems to work very badly, making one process swap more means it pagefaults more and sucks up more IO bandwidth ;) regards, Rik -- Shortwave goes a long way: irc.starchat.net #swl http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ - 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/