lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1997]   [Jul]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: mmap/write vs read/write supprise
Date
From
Eric.Schenk@dna.lth.se wrote:
>
>
> mcculley@iag.net <mcculley@iag.net> writes:
> >If we had madvise, the responsibility for determining the access
> >pattern could be put on the application. We could still use a better
> >default access pattern for mmap'd pages, though. Is the VM code
> >sophisticated enough yet to take advantage of an madvise syscall?
>
> Another approach to this would be to use a predictive algorithm
> to determine which pages to prefetch. There was a neat article
> on doing this in JACM recently. The idea is to use the core of
> a good compression algorithm as the predictor. Apparently
> this can be proved to be within a constant of the optimal
> prefect strategy (i.e. the one that knows all future
> fetches in advance). I don't know off hand what the real
> performance of this would be like for kernel VM, but
> someone ambitious with a lot of time on their hands
> may want to play :)

Compression algorithm (compress, gzip) work by assigning "short
bitstreams" to "strings that we've recently seen".

I don't see how this can be adapted to predicting access patterns.

ROger.


>
> --
> Eric Schenk www: http://www.dna.lth.se/~erics
> Dept. of Comp. Sci., Lund University email: Eric.Schenk@dna.lth.se
> Box 118, S-221 00 LUND, Sweden fax: +46-46 13 10 21 ph: +46-46 222 96 38
>
>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:39    [W:0.030 / U:0.092 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site