[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1169643488.6189.18.camel@twins>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 13:58:08 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>,
Aubrey Li <aubreylee@...il.com>,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Robin Getz <rgetz@...ckfin.uclinux.org>,
"Henn, erich, Michael" <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Limit the size of the pagecache
On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 23:50 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 16:49 -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>
> >>2. Insure rapid turnaround of pages in the cache.
>
> [...]
>
> > The only maybe valid point would be 2, and I'd like to see if we can't
> > solve that differently - a better use-once logic comes to mind.
>
> There must be something I'm missing with that point. The faster
> the turnaround of pagecache pages, the *less* efficiently the
> pagecache is working (assuming a rapid turnaround means a high
> rate of pages brought into, then reclaimed from pagecache).
>
> I can't argue that a smaller pagecache will be subject to a
> higher turnaround given the same workload, but I don't know why
> that would be a good thing.
I interpreted the issue as selecting the wrong pages for the 'working
set'. Like not quickly evicting pages from a large streaming read, which
then pushes out more useful pages.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists