Re: Change in default vm_dirty_ratio

[Nadia Derbey <Nadia.Derbey@bull.net>]

Dave Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 04:47:11PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
>  > Frankly, I find it very depressing that the kernel defaults matter.  These
>  > things are trivially tunable and you'd think that after all these years,
>  > distro initscripts would be establishing the settings, based upon expected
>  > workload, amount of memory, number and bandwidth of attached devices, etc.
>
> "This is hard, lets make it someone else's problem" shouldn't ever be the
> answer, especially if the end result is that we become even more
> dependant on bits of userspace running before the system becomes useful.
>
>  > Heck, there should even be userspace daemons which observe ongoing system
>  > behaviour and which adaptively tune these things to the most appropriate
>  > level.
>  > 
>  > But nope, nothing.
>
> See the 'libtune' crack that people have been trying to get distros to
> adopt for a long time.
> If we need some form of adaptive behaviour, the kernel needs to be
> doing this monitoring/adapting, not some userspace daemon that may
> not get scheduled before its too late.

I'm wondering whether AKT I proposed a couple of months ago wouldn't be 
more appropriate (provided that we find the perfect heuristics to tune 
the dirty_ratio ;-) )
see thread http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/16/16

Regards,
Nadia


-
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/