From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 1 02:22:07 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F394C37B401 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2003 02:22:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.broadpark.no (mail.broadpark.no [217.13.4.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F207843F75 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2003 02:22:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from smtp.des.no (37.80-203-228.nextgentel.com [80.203.228.37]) by mail.broadpark.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8982B78B84; Fri, 1 Aug 2003 11:22:04 +0200 (MEST) Received: by smtp.des.no (Pony Express, from userid 666) id 53B0D962E6; Fri, 1 Aug 2003 11:22:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from dwp.des.no (dwp.des.no [10.0.0.4]) by smtp.des.no (Pony Express) with ESMTP id B8BEC960FA; Fri, 1 Aug 2003 11:22:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: by dwp.des.no (Postfix, from userid 2602) id 88C62B824; Fri, 1 Aug 2003 11:22:00 +0200 (CEST) To: "Poul-Henning Kamp" References: <6955.1059728599@critter.freebsd.dk> From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 11:22:00 +0200 In-Reply-To: <6955.1059728599@critter.freebsd.dk> (Poul-Henning Kamp's message of "Fri, 01 Aug 2003 11:03:19 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.090024 (Oort Gnus v0.24) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=8.0 tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES, REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_GNUS_UA version=2.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) cc: Peter Jeremy cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: headsup: swap_pager.c X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 09:22:07 -0000 "Poul-Henning Kamp" writes: > The thing you overlook is that often when things gets paged out, the > system is short on memory and therefore more likely to not do anything > productive, whereas when things gets paged in, there are a better chance > of some other process being able to use the CPU time productively. > If we did predictive pageouts like some of the "serious" mainfram OS's > this would be less true. How hard would it be to get the kernel to write the pages "most likely to be swapped out" to swap in the idle loop, to save time if / when they actually need to be swapped out later? I thought we already did this to some extent (ref. FAQ 16.1), but apparently I was wrong? DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no