Re: [PATCH] 2.2.17pre7 VM enhancement Re: I/O performance on

[Andrea Arcangeli]

On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:

>I applied your balance dirty patch against 2.2.17pre9, plus the protected
>ramdisk memory patch.  

Ok good. (btw, does protected-balance fix all your out of memory problems
with the installer, right?)

>I also changed the buffer cache dirty percentage check at the end of
>try_to_free_buffers to use the new balance_dirty_state:
>
>+       if(balance_dirty_state(NODEV) >= 0)
>+               wakeup_bdflush(0);
>
>Testing dbench with 48 clients, I got 17MB/s with 2.2.17pre9, and 21MB/sec
>with 2.2.17pre9 + this patch.
		 ^^^^^^^^^^^^
I spend an relevat effort to take all the patches separated and ordered,
so I'd appreciate if you could avoid to mix them.

About the change you did to the second patch, as far I can see it's the
strightforward porting of the 20_buf-flushing-5 patch in 2.2.17pre6aa2 to
2.2.17pre9.

Andrea