| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 09:08:02 +0200 From: Bongani Hlope <bhlope@...b.co.za> To: Rene Herman <rene.herman@...il.com> Cc: Robert Deaton <false.hopes@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ck list <ck@....kolivas.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org Subject: Re: updatedb On Thursday 26 July 2007 08:56:59 Rene Herman wrote: > On 07/26/2007 08:39 AM, Bongani Hlope wrote: > > On Thursday 26 July 2007 05:59:53 Rene Herman wrote: > >> So what's happening? If you sit down with a copy op "top" in one > >> terminal and updatedb in another, what does it show? > > > > Just tested that, there's a steady increase in the useage of buff > > Great. Now concentrate on the "swpd" column, as it's the only thing > relevant here. The fact that an updatedb run fills/replaces caches is > completely and utterly unsurprising and not something swap-prefetch helps > with. The only thing it does is bring back stuff from _swap_. > ;) I have 2Gb of RAM and I never ever touched swap on all my work loads. I was just showing the behavior of updatedb on my desktop. I have never even looked at the swap-prefetch patch (for obvious reasons). I think people should also look at their /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_ratio - 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