[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090428164050.EBD2.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:44:29 +0900 (JST)
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: Elladan <elladan@...imo.com>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Swappiness vs. mmap() and interactive response
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 03:52:29PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > > 3. cache limitation of memcgroup solve this problem?
> > >
> > > I was unable to get this to work -- do you have some documentation handy?
> >
> > Do you have kernel source tarball?
> > Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt explain usage kindly.
>
> Thank you. My documentation was out of date.
>
> I created a cgroup with limited memory and placed a copy command in it, and the
> latency problem seems to essentially go away. However, I'm also a bit
> suspicious that my test might have become invalid, since my IO performance
> seems to have dropped somewhat too.
>
> So, am I right in concluding that this more or less implicates bad page
> replacement as the culprit? After I dropped vm caches and let my working set
> re-form, the memory cgroup seems to be effective at keeping a large pool of
> memory free from file pressure.
Hmm..
it seems your result mean bad page replacement occur. but actually
I hevn't seen such result on my environment.
Hmm, I think I need to make reproduce environmet to your trouble.
Thanks.
--
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