Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 00:11:01 +0000 From: Colin Percival <colin.percival@wadham.ox.ac.uk> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Good BSD/Linux Article (somewhat off-topic) Message-ID: <6.0.1.1.1.20040118000417.02bbee70@imap.sfu.ca> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040117185613.22159B-100000@fledge.watson.o rg> References: <6.0.1.1.1.20040116175159.03f4dd48@imap.sfu.ca> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040117185613.22159B-100000@fledge.watson.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
At 23:59 17/01/2004, Robert Watson wrote: >I suspect that the /. effect has gotten easier to carry >over time in part because a lot of the clients are higher bandwidth than >they were before -- if you have moderate size files being tranfered, lots >of long-lived slow connections take up a lot more memory than short-lived >ones. Actually, this raises an interesting point -- if 1. There is a significant amount of network traffic, 2. There is memory pressure, and 3. There are several runnable processes, it might be a good idea to give scheduling priority to the oldest process, in the hope that it will complete and free its memory. Colin Percivalhome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6.0.1.1.1.20040118000417.02bbee70>