Re: Performance 2.4.8 is worse than 2.4.x<8

Steve Kieu (haiquy@yahoo.com)
Sun, 12 Aug 2001 21:06:17 +1000 (EST)


--- Mike Galbraith <mikeg@wen-online.de> wrote: > On
Sun, 12 Aug 2001, Steve Kieu wrote:
>
> > Anyone noticed that?
>
> Details?

VM is very much improved but it seems to take
resources to free cached pages.
> Here, disk write throughput seems to want some
> tweaking, and Bonnie

that is what I see

doing it's rewrite test triggers a very large and
> persistant inactive
> shortage which shouldn't be there (imho).
>
> page_launder() is definitely working better than
> some of the pre8
> kernels in that it is no longer laundering the
> entire dirty list in
> one huge gulp. It is also no longer laundering some
> random amount.
>
> Under FWIW: I can find no reason for the existance
> of either the
> launder_loop nor doing synchronous IO. Here, I
> remove both regularly
> and detect nothing but benefit both in responsivness
> and throughput.
>
> -Mike
>

=====
S.KIEU

_____________________________________________________________________________
http://shopping.yahoo.com.au - Father's Day Shopping
- Find the perfect gift for your Dad for Father's Day
-
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/