Linux-kernel mailing list archive 1998-10,: Re: 2.1.89 broken?

# Re: 2.1.89 broken?

Rik van Riel (H.H.vanRiel@fys.ruu.nl)
Tue, 10 Mar 1998 09:38:41 +0100 (MET)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Rik van Riel: "Re: SPAM: suggestion for listowner"
- Previous message: Uwe Bonnes: "Re: SPAM on linux-kernel (was Re: Forwarded mail....)"
- Next in thread: Trond Eivind =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Glomsr=F8d?=: "Re: 2.1.89 broken?"
- Reply: Trond Eivind =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Glomsr=F8d?=: "Re: 2.1.89 broken?"

On 10 Mar 1998, Trond Eivind =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Glomsr=F8d?= wrote:
> Scott Lampert <fortunato@heavymetal.org> writes:
> > It works for me on my 233MMX, however it seems to be far
> > less efficient than prior kernels when it comes to memory handling.
> > It doesn't seem to want to give up much memory from the disk cache,
> > prefering to stick stuff in swap first.
>
> That is my experience as well... I've got 80 MB. It was happy with
> about 56 MB for caches, 4 MB free and a little less than 20 MB
> used. Oh - and 75 MB used swap.

You both seem to be ignoring the fact that sticking
unused stuff in swap is better than freeing disk
cache pages. In 2.1.89 we age disk cache pages in
much the same way we age private (in-swap) pages.
Because the aging is the same, you can be quite sure
that Linux is doing the right thing...

(and I haven't heard you about worse performance either)

Rik.
+-----------------------------+------------------------------+
| For Linux mm-patches, go to | "I'm busy managing memory.." |
| my homepage (via LinuxHQ). | H.H.vanRiel@fys.ruu.nl |
| ...submissions welcome... | http://www.fys.ruu.nl/~riel/ |
+-----------------------------+------------------------------+

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu

- Next message: Rik van Riel: "Re: SPAM: suggestion for listowner"
- Previous message: Uwe Bonnes: "Re: SPAM on linux-kernel (was Re: Forwarded mail....)"
- Next in thread: Trond Eivind =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Glomsr=F8d?=: "Re: 2.1.89 broken?"
- Reply: Trond Eivind =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Glomsr=F8d?=: "Re: 2.1.89 broken?"