Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2008 17:15:26 +0100
From: Lukas Hejtmanek <xhejtman@ics.muni.cz>
To: Paulo Marques <pmarques@grupopie.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Disk schedulers
Message-ID: <20080216161526.GH4269@ics.muni.cz>
References: <20080214162104.GA5347@ics.muni.cz> <47B5CAE4.1000905@grupopie.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <47B5CAE4.1000905@grupopie.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 941
Lines: 19

On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 05:24:52PM +0000, Paulo Marques wrote:
> If you want to take advantage of all that memory to buffer disk writes,  
> so that the reads can proceed better, you might want to tweak your  
> /proc/sys/vm/dirty_ratio amd /proc/sys/vm/dirty_background_ratio to more  
> appropriate values. (maybe also dirty_writeback_centisecs and  
> dirty_expire_centisecs)

I don't feel like to have my whole memory eaten by a single file which is not
to be read again and thus it is pretty useless. Instead, I would like to see
slowdown of scp so that other processes can also access disk. Why is this
possible with kernel process scheduler and not with IO scheduler?

-- 
Luk?? Hejtm?nek
--
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/