Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 14:58:53 -0300 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br> To: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com> Cc: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za>, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, Dennis Glatting <dennis.glatting@software-munitions.com>, <freebsd-stable@frebsd.org>, <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: pgm to kill 4.3 via vm Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0105071455200.18102-100000@duckman.distro.conectiva> In-Reply-To: <200105071709.f47H9Pr61499@earth.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 7 May 2001, Matt Dillon wrote: > their hands of the whole affair. A production machine with 128M of ram > and 1G of swap is going to go down the tubes performance-wise long > before it runs out of swap. Performance degredation under heavy > memory loads is a much more interesting and important problem > then swap exhaustion. Indeed, this is an interesting area. In the process of researching how to best implement this for Linux I have found various reasons why both FreeBSD's and NetBSD's load control systems cannot work in various realistic scenarios. The next step is designing a load control system that does work (not too hard) and having a reliable way of detecting when exactly the system is thrashing (next to impossible?). I'll make a detailed writeup of exactly why FreeBSD's load control system cannot work and will post it to arch@freebsd.org and linux-mm@kvack.org soon... ;) regards, Rik -- Linux MM bugzilla: http://linux-mm.org/bugzilla.shtml Virtual memory is like a game you can't win; However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose... http://www.surriel.com/ http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.33.0105071455200.18102-100000>