Date: Mon, 6 Mar 95 11:30:03 MST From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) To: davidg@Root.COM Cc: bde@zeta.org.au, current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: more ETXTBSY bugs Message-ID: <9503061830.AA18781@cs.weber.edu> In-Reply-To: <199503061602.IAA00634@corbin.Root.COM> from "David Greenman" at Mar 6, 95 08:02:54 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >All this may be old behaviour. There is certainly some new behaviour: > >The ETXTBUSY bit didn't go away while I was running `make' in the > >background for 10-20 minutes. Perhaps the vnode and associated buffers > >didn't go away either, and clog up the caches. > > There are a lot more cached objects than before (several thousand on a > machine with a lot of memory). You'd have to access several thousand > previously unaccessed files before you'd flush out the one that is VTEXT. There is an intentionally restrictive buffer cache limit of 10% of available memory in some modern systems because of this problem. Is this a good or a bad idea? A lot of what is "common knowledge about VM" is no longer applicable with a unified cache, so this limit might not be as good an idea as it seems to be. Terry Lambert terry@cs.weber.edu --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9503061830.AA18781>