Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 04:41:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 04:41:18 -0400 Received: from amsfep16-int.chello.nl ([213.46.243.25]:36898 "EHLO amsfep16-int.chello.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 04:41:17 -0400 Message-ID: <3D2BF3CC.3040409@users.sf.net> Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 10:43:56 +0200 From: Thomas Tonino User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.1a) Gecko/20020610 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org CC: "J.A. Magallon" Subject: Re: Terrible VM in 2.4.11+? References: <20020709001137.A1745@mail.muni.cz> <1026167822.16937.5.camel@UberGeek> <20020709005025.B1745@mail.muni.cz> <20020708225816.GA1948@werewolf.able.es> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1568 Lines: 38 J.A. Magallon wrote: > Seriously, if you have that kind of problems, take the -aa kernel and use it. > I use it regularly and it behaves as one would expect, and fast. > And please, report your results... I run a 2 cpu server with 16 disks and around 5 megabytes of writes a second. With plain 2.4.18 (using the feral.com qlogic driver) and 2GB ram, this seemed okay. Upgrading to 4GB ram slowed the system down, and normal shell commands became quite unresponsive with 4GB. So we built a second server, with 2.4.19-pre9-aa2 using the qlogic driver in the kernel. That driver needs patching, as it will otherwise get stuck in a 'no handle slots' condition. Used a patch that I posted to linux-scsi a while ago. This combination works great so far. In the meantime, the 2.4.18 box has been left running, but the load shoots up to 75 sometimes with no apparent reason (the -aa2 box stays below a load of 3). Once the 2.4.18 box was really wedged: load at 70, server process stuck. I logged in and the system was very responsive, but in reponse to a reboot the system just sat there. So we're going with 2.4.19-pre9-aa2 for now. I don't yet understand the -aa series, for example how 2.4.19-rc1-aa1 would relate to 2.4.19-pre9-aa2, so I'm a bit wary of just upgrading in the -aa series right now. Thomas - 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/