> Any faults in that reasoning? GNU sort uses a merge sort with temporary files on disk. Not sure how much it keeps in memory during that, but it's probably less than 150MB. At some point the dirty limit should kick in and write back the data of the temporary files; so it's not quite the same as anonymous memory. But it's not that different given. It would be better to measure than to guess. At least Andrew's measurements on 128MB actually didn't show updatedb being really that big a problem. Perhaps some people have much more files or simply a less efficient updatedb implementation? I guess the people who complain here that loudly really need to supply some real numbers. -Andi - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
- From: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
- Re: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
- From: Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@enter.net>
- Re: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
- From: Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@gmx.de>
- 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" <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>
- Re: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
- From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
- Re: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
- From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
- Re: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
- From: Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@enter.net>
- Re: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
- From: Rene Herman <rene.herman@gmail.com>
- Re: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]
- From: Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@gmx.de>
- Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
- Prev by Date: Re: UML compile error
- Next by Date: [PATCH] lzo: Add some missing casts
- 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):
![]() |