public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@ithnet.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: mcelrath@draal.physics.wisc.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: "Cached" grows and grows and grows...
Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 18:47:58 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20010908184758.696bb9d1.skraw@ithnet.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E15fTuS-0002g1-00@the-village.bc.nu>
In-Reply-To: <20010907191349.457cad95.skraw@ithnet.com> <E15fTuS-0002g1-00@the-village.bc.nu>

On Fri, 7 Sep 2001 23:15:36 +0100 (BST) Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
wrote:

> > To tell you the honest truth: you are not alone in cosmos (with this
problem)
> > ;-)
> > To give you that explicit hint for saving money: do not buy mem, it will be
> > eaten up by recent kernels without any performance gain or other positive
> > impact whatsoever. 
> 
> Pick up a 2.4.9-ac kernel, and you shouldnt be seeing the problem (I say
> shouldnt, I'm not 100% convinced its all under control)

VERY FUNNY, Alan!

2.4.9-ac9: __alloc_pages:

        /* No luck.. */
//      printk(KERN_ERR "__alloc_pages: %lu-order allocation failed.\n", order)
        return NULL;

If there is no printk, you will obviously not notice the problem. You can bet
your car on not "seeing the problem".
 
> > Try using 2.4.4, if it doesn't succeed, forget 2.4 and use 2.2.19. That
works.
> > Unfortunately you may have to completely reinstall your system when going
back
> > to 2.2.
> 
> That should not be needed at all. 

Well, as long as you do not use any features that made you install 2.4 before,
e.g. files > 2GB and some others. Of course, if you do not use these, you might
be better of with 2.2 anyway.

That was not a very convincing comment, Alan.
But I must admit one thing: 2.4.9-ac9 runs smoother in my test. There are no
delays experienced during which the system desperately seeks mem. In fact I can
see a lot of inact_clean nearly all the time (a lot means 200-600 MB).
Nevertheless there _is_ a problem, because nfs still fails on low mem situation
when option "no_subtree_check" is _off_/not used.

I will have some closer looks on ac tree.

Regards,
Stephan

  parent reply	other threads:[~2001-09-08 16:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-09-07 16:08 "Cached" grows and grows and grows Bob McElrath
2001-09-07 17:13 ` Stephan von Krawczynski
2001-09-07 22:15   ` Alan Cox
2001-09-07 22:24     ` Bob McElrath
2001-09-08  0:53     ` VM improvement in -ac [was: "Cached" grows and grows and grows...] Mike Fedyk
2001-09-08 16:47     ` Stephan von Krawczynski [this message]
2001-09-08 17:14       ` "Cached" grows and grows and grows Alan Cox
2001-09-09 13:15         ` Stephan von Krawczynski
2001-09-09 13:34           ` Alan Cox
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-09-26  1:55 M. Edward Borasky

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20010908184758.696bb9d1.skraw@ithnet.com \
    --to=skraw@ithnet.com \
    --cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mcelrath@draal.physics.wisc.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox