From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 14 Mar 2003 13:30:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 14 Mar 2003 13:30:17 -0500 Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.130]:64495 "EHLO e32.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 14 Mar 2003 13:30:16 -0500 Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 10:31:18 -0800 From: "Martin J. Bligh" To: "Gregory K. Ruiz-Ade" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.4.20 instability on bigmem systems? Message-ID: <127170000.1047666678@flay> In-Reply-To: <200303131627.22572.gregory@castandcrew.com> References: <200303131627.22572.gregory@castandcrew.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.2 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > The primary problem: Whenever any process (or set of processes) initiates > intensive disk I/O, the system grinds to a halt, kswapd and kupdated > consume upwards of 40% to 60% CPU each, and system load averages can jump > upwards of 21.00. The problem can be replicated with a simple find command > ("find / -print" seems to do it nicely). Well known set of problems. 2.4 vm sucks on big machines. Run 2.5, 2.4-aa, or UL. Yes, you can spend a few weeks beating your head against a brick wall gathering various bugfixes if you like ... but you'll probably just end up with a sore head ... M.