Re: ~500 megs cached yet 2.6.5 goes into swap hell

Chris Friesen
2004-04-29T16:37:07Z

Martin J. Bligh wrote:

> The latency for interactive stuff is definitely more noticeable though, and
> thus arguably more important. Perhaps we should be tying the scheduler in
> more tightly with the VM - we've already decided there which apps are
> "interactive" and thus need low latency ... shouldn't we be giving a boost
> to their RAM pages as well, and favour keeping those paged in over other
> pages (whether other apps, or cache) logically? It's all latency still ...

I like this idea. Maybe make it more general though--tasks with high scheduler priority also get
more of a memory priority boost. This will factor in the static priority as well as the
interactivity bonus.

Chris