Re: RFT: updatedb "morning after" problem [was: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23]

[Rene Herman <rene.herman@gmail.com>]

On 07/29/2007 03:12 PM, Alan Cox wrote:

> > What are the tradeoffs here? What wants small chunks? Also, as far as
> > I'm aware Linux does not do things like up the granularity when it
> > notices it's swapping in heavily? That sounds sort of promising...
>
> Small chunks means you get better efficiency of memory use - large chunks
> mean you may well page in a lot more than you needed to each time (and 
> cause more paging in turn). Your disk would prefer you fed it big linear
> I/O's - 512KB would probably be my first guess at tuning a large box 
> under load for paging chunk size.

That probably kills my momentary hope that I was looking at yet another good 
use of large soft-pages seeing as how 512K would be going overboard a bit 
right? :-/

> More radically if anyone wants to do real researchy type work - how about
> log structured swap with a cleaner  ?

Right over my head. Why does log-structure help anything?

Rene.

-
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/