Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 5 Mar 2001 08:05:13 +0100 (CET) | From | Mike Galbraith <> | Subject | Re: VM balancing problems under 2.4.2-ac1 |
| |
On Sun, 4 Mar 2001, Ingo Oeser wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 01:03:26AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > If anybody as a good idea to make this code auto-balancing, > > > please let me know. > > > > I have no idea for auto-balancing but another idea: It's one possibility > > to let the user choose when doing "make *config" what he wants: > > > > - A VM optimized for servers that swaps out applications in favor of > > caching. > > or > > - A VM optimized for workstations that won't swap out applications in > > favor of caching. > > I thought about the same thing sometimes (but for other troughput > vs. latency decisions, too). > > But I realized, that my very own workstation is also a server, > since it runs an httpd, mysqld, smbd, ftpd etc. > > And somtimes the servers become very busy in our LAN[1]. > > IF we want that tuning, we should have it as a sysctl. Most of it > is already possible with /proc/sys/vm/*, but balancing decisions > are still missing.
I think sysctls for balancing knobs is a great idea. The VM has no clue concerning the cost of rebuilding cache eg but a human may.
Automatic tuning would be wonderful, but it requires information which the VM flat doesn't have.. so it should ask the boss for help.
Three handy knobs I can think of off the top of my head are swap_size, flush_size [for page_launder().. bdflush has that] and cache_stickiness.
-Mike
- 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/
| |