On Sat, Dec 31, 2005 at 09:53:11AM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

+/*
+ * For interactive workloads, we remember about as many non-resident pages
+ * as we have actual memory pages.  For server workloads with large inter-
+ * reference distances we could benefit from remembering more. 
+ */

This comment is bogus. Interactive or server loads have nothing to do
with the inter reference distance. To the contrary, interactive loads
have a higher chance to contain large inter reference distances, and
many common server loads have strong locality.

<snip>

Happy to drop it, Rik?

Sorry, but the comment is accurate.

For interactive workloads you want to forget interreference
distances between two updatedbs, even if mozilla didn't get
used all weekend.

OTOH, on NFS servers, or other systems with large interreference
distances, you may _need_ to remember a larger set of non-resident
pages in order to find the pages that are the hottest.

In those workloads, the shortest inter-reference distance might
still be larger than the size of memory...

Sure, for the few cases you describe here the comment is valid.

Happy new year! 

--
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-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>