On Mon, 28 Aug 2000, Jan Astalos wrote:

I still claim that per user swapfiles will:
- be _much_ more efficient in the sense of wasting disk space (saving money)
  because it will teach users efficiently use their memory resources (if
  user will waste the space inside it's own disk quota it will be his own
  problem)
- provide QoS on VM memory allocation to users (will guarantee amount of
  available VM for user)
- be able to improve _per_user_ performance of system (localizing performance
  problems to users that caused them and reducing disk seek times)
- shift the problem with OOM from system to user.

Do you have any reasons for this, or are you just asserting
them as if they were fact? ;)

I think we can achieve the same thing, with higher over-all
system performance, if we simply give each user a VM quota
and do the bookkeeping on a central swap area.

The reasons for this are multiple:
1) having one swap partition will reduce disk seeks
   (no matter how you put it, disk seeks are a _system_
   thing, not a per user thing)
2) not all users are logged in at the same time, so you
   can do a minimal form of overcomitting here (if you want)
3) you can easily give users _2_ VM quotas, a guaranteed one
   and a maximum one ... if a user goes over the guaranteed
   quota, processes can be killed in OOM situations
   (this allows each user to make their own choices wrt.
   overcommitment)

regards,


Rik
--
"What you're running that piece of shit Gnome?!?!"
       -- Miguel de Icaza, UKUUG 2000

http://www.conectiva.com/		http://www.surriel.com/

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/