From: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>
Cc: Daniel Phillips <phillips@arcor.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>,
Lorenzo Allegrucci <l.allegrucci@tiscalinet.it>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: qsbench, interesting results
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 10:15:39 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021001101539.F5595@work.bitmover.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L.0210011348060.653-100000@duckman.distro.conectiva>; from riel@conectiva.com.br on Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 01:52:25PM -0300
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 01:52:25PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > On Monday 30 September 2002 07:57, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > I'll take a look at some preferential throttling later on. But
> > > I must say that I'm not hugely worried about performance regression
> > > under wild swapstorms. The correct fix is to go buy some more
> > > RAM, and the kernel should not be trying to cater for underprovisioned
> > > machines if that affects the usual case.
> >
> > The operative phrase here is "if that affects the usual case".
> > Actually, the quicksort bench is not that bad a model of a usual case,
> > i.e., a working set 50% bigger than RAM.
>
> Having the working set of one process larger than RAM is
> a highly unusual case ...
"bk -r check -acv" on the linux-2.5 tree shows up as 39MB RSS in top and is
actually much bigger, it wants all of the SCCS files in ram to go fast.
If they are, it's about 15 seconds on a Ghz box, if they aren't, it's
mucho longer. I _think_ we're careful to not go back and look at the
same files twice but I might be smoking crack. All I know is that
running a check on a 128MB machine is painful as hell.
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-10-01 17:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-09-29 14:15 qsbench, interesting results Lorenzo Allegrucci
2002-09-29 16:26 ` bert hubert
2002-09-29 19:56 ` Lorenzo Allegrucci
2002-09-29 20:00 ` bert hubert
2002-09-29 21:05 ` Lorenzo Allegrucci
2002-09-30 5:57 ` Andrew Morton
2002-10-01 14:05 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-10-01 16:52 ` Rik van Riel
2002-10-01 17:03 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-10-01 17:13 ` Rik van Riel
2002-10-01 17:20 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-10-01 17:29 ` Rik van Riel
2002-10-01 17:38 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-10-01 18:18 ` Lorenzo Allegrucci
2002-10-01 17:15 ` Larry McVoy [this message]
2002-10-01 18:04 ` Andrew Morton
2002-10-01 18:20 ` Rik van Riel
2002-10-01 18:35 ` Daniel Phillips
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=20021001101539.F5595@work.bitmover.com \
--to=lm@bitmover.com \
--cc=akpm@digeo.com \
--cc=l.allegrucci@tiscalinet.it \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=phillips@arcor.de \
--cc=riel@conectiva.com.br \
/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