Re: Chronic resource starvation.

[Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>]

On Sat, 2012-01-14 at 14:21 -0600, Mike Mestnik wrote:
> On 01/13/12 21:17, Mike Mestnik wrote:
> > I've dealt with applications taking extended time off for a number of
> > years.  I typically attribute it to applications being overly zealous
> > about eating memory as most every application tends to do these days.  I
> > had always figured that there a likely plenty of ppl complaining and I
> > didn't want to get the boiler plat answer that resources are cheap.
> >
> > I refuse to buy into the idea that Z computers can get an additional Y
> > resource to run application X, when instead application X could be
> > engineered once and for all.  This ideology is not sustainable and
> > eventually will crash upon it's self.  I call this Z * Y < X.  The
> > application source becomes the single location where every computers
> > resources can be increased at the cost of much less then to adjust the
> > running environment of every location that the code may run.
> >
> > Here is a 84MB video that demonstrates the issue.
> > http://j.mp/wavbCO
> > http://bitly.com/wavbCO+
> I'm glad to see a number of you have clicked on this link.
> 
> Does this behavior look normal or is it just my system?  If it is normal
> how difficult would it be to make corrections and would those
> corrections likely be kernel or application related?

That "Backup complete" makes me suspect a classic case of IO-itis.  If
bits of your GUI were pushed out or ram (or weren't previously used),
and live on a disk you're beating hell out of, you get to experience
horrid interactivity while those missing bits are being retrieved.

	-Mike