Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 27 Jul 2002 16:47:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 27 Jul 2002 16:47:17 -0400 Received: from garrincha.netbank.com.br ([200.203.199.88]:12046 "HELO garrincha.netbank.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sat, 27 Jul 2002 16:47:16 -0400 Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 17:50:17 -0300 (BRT) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: riel@imladris.surriel.com To: Buddy Lumpkin cc: Ville Herva , DervishD , Linux-kernel Subject: RE: About the need of a swap area 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 Content-Length: 1144 Lines: 34 On Sat, 27 Jul 2002, Buddy Lumpkin wrote: > >Much more. > > > >The latency difference seems to be on the order of 100000 times. > >It is the latency we care about because that determines how long > >the CPU cannot do anything useful but has to wait. > > And if you look at the ratio between the access time of ram which is in > the low nanoseconds (1* 10 ^ -9) ... and compare it to the seek + > rotational delay of a discrete spindal which is in low milliseconds (1* > 10 ^ -3) that puts you at a ratio of about 1000000. Indeed. Now imagine one in every million memory accesses results in a major page fault ... your computer would run at 1/2 speed. The difference between a 99.999% hit rate and 99.9999% hit rate becomes rather important with these latency ratios ;) regards, Rik -- Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH". 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/