On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 01:05:13PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Ok perhaps the new adaptive dirty limits helps your single disk
> a lot too. But your improvements seem to be more "collateral damage" @)
>
> But if that was true it might be enough to just change the dirty limits
> to get the same effect on your system. You might want to play with
> /proc/sys/vm/dirty_*
The adaptive dirty limit is per task so it can't be reproduced with
global sysctl. It made quite some difference when I researched into it
in function of time. This isn't in function of time but it certainly
makes a lot of difference too, actually it's the most important part
of the patchset for most people, the rest is for the corner cases that
aren't handled right currently (writing to a slow device with
writeback cache has always been hanging the whole thing).
-
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]
