From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Feb 28 22:03:13 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1517106566B;
	Tue, 28 Feb 2012 22:03:13 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from root@tensor.gdynia.pl)
Received: from tensor.gdynia.pl (tensor.gdynia.pl [89.206.35.72])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEE198FC18;
	Tue, 28 Feb 2012 22:03:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: Received: from 127.0.0.1 (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.4/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q1SLR5Vl035871;
	Tue, 28 Feb 2012 22:27:05 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from root@tensor.gdynia.pl)
Received: (from root@localhost)
	by tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q1SLR54V035870;
	Tue, 28 Feb 2012 22:27:05 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from root)
Newsgroups: 
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 22:06:12 +0100 (CET)
From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
To: Artem Belevich <art@freebsd.org>
Fcc: sent-mail
In-Reply-To: <CAFqOu6hy9S5PHcff4YnoMow5+pNT+s_7PXLq+1+HuiBrW+G3yQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1202282205350.32088@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1202251630560.1436@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
	<4F4C0726.6010804@FreeBSD.org>
	<alpine.BSF.2.00.1202281043170.1739@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
	<4F4CAAC1.9060908@FreeBSD.org>
	<CAFqOu6hy9S5PHcff4YnoMow5+pNT+s_7PXLq+1+HuiBrW+G3yQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
X-Reply-UID: (2 > )(1 1330463121 54)/home/wojtek/Maildir/FreeBSD-hackers
X-Reply-Mbox: #md/Maildir/FreeBSD-hackers
X-Cursor-Pos: : 397
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED;
	BOUNDARY="2456600518-547007317-1330463172=:32088"
Status: 
X-Status: 
X-Keywords: 
X-UID: 1
X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.6
	(tensor.gdynia.pl [89.206.35.72]);
	Tue, 28 Feb 2012 22:27:06 +0100 (CET)
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Grzegorz Kulewski <grzegorz@kulewski.pl>,
	Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: improving VM - questions
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 22:03:13 -0000

--2456600518-547007317-1330463172=:32088
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE

>>> right. but still 32 pages is 128kB, but i see 64kB I/Os in systat/vmsta=
t
>>
>> Right, but the comment says to not define MAX_PAGEOUT_CLUSTER to a value=
 greater
>> than 32, but you did that. =C2=A0So all bets could be off unless you exa=
mined the
>> code and know exactly what should happen in this case.
>
> I suspect it might be DFLTPHYS that splits disk i/o into 64K blocks on
> the driver level.
can i increase DFLTPHYS as well as i did with MAXPHYS without problems?
--2456600518-547007317-1330463172=:32088--