* Andi Kleen <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Monday 06 February 2006 11:11, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Andi Kleen <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Of course there might be some corner cases where using local memory
> > > for caching is still better (like mmap file IO), but my guess is that
> > > it isn't a good default.
> >
> > /tmp is almost certainly one where local memory is better.
>
> Not sure. What happens if someone writes a 1GB /tmp file on a 1GB
> node?
well, if the pagecache is filled on a node above a certain ratio then
one would have to spread it out forcibly. But otherwise, try to keep
things as local as possible, because that will perform best. This is
different from the case Paul's patch is addressing: workloads which are
known to be global (and hence spreading out is the best-performing
allocation).
(for which problem i suggested a per-mount/directory/file
locality-of-reference attribute in another post.)
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
