On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 01:47:49 -0700 Andrew Morton <[email protected]> wrote: > More sophisticated testing is needed - there's something in > ext3-tools which will mmap, page in and hold a file for you. So much for that theory. afaict mmapped, active pagecache is immune to updatedb activity. It just sits there while updatedb continues munching away at the slab and blockdev pagecache which it instantiated. I assume we're never getting the VM into enough trouble to tip it over the start-reclaiming-mapped-pages threshold (ie: /proc/sys/vm/swappiness). Start the updatedb on this 128MB machine with 80MB of mapped pagecache, it falls to 55MB fairly soon and then never changes. So hrm. Are we sure that updatedb is the problem? There are quite a few heavyweight things which happen in the wee small hours. - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
- From: Mike Galbraith <[email protected]>
- Re: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
- References:
- Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
- From: "Jesper Juhl" <[email protected]>
- Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
- From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
- From: "Ray Lee" <[email protected]>
- Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
- From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
- From: "Ray Lee" <[email protected]>
- Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
- From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
- From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
- Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
- From: Frank Kingswood <[email protected]>
- Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
- From: Mike Galbraith <[email protected]>
- Re: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
- From: Mike Galbraith <[email protected]>
- Re: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
- From: Mike Galbraith <[email protected]>
- Re: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 06/68] 0 -> NULL, for arch/frv
- Next by Date: Re: [patch] nfs: fix locking in nfs/inode.c in nfs_free_open_context
- Previous by thread: Re: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
- Next by thread: Re: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
- Index(es):