From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 19:31:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 19:31:05 -0500 Received: from penguin.e-mind.com ([195.223.140.120]:15154 "EHLO penguin.e-mind.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 19:30:53 -0500 Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 01:31:09 +0100 From: Andrea Arcangeli To: Sasi Peter Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: 2.2.19pre6aa1 degraded performance for me... Message-ID: <20010110013109.N29904@athlon.random> In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ; from sape@iq.rulez.org on Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 01:07:55AM +0100 X-GnuPG-Key-URL: http://e-mind.com/~andrea/aa.gnupg.asc X-PGP-Key-URL: http://e-mind.com/~andrea/aa.asc Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 01:07:55AM +0100, Sasi Peter wrote: > I thought it over again. I still have to say it is a nonsense for a kernel > not to have _anything_ (zero pages) currently unused swapped out under > such an I/O load! Could you generate some furhter memory pressure to see what happens? Do you confirm that you get the same performance as with your previous kernel if the idle servers gets swapped out or if you shutdown them? Andrea - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/