From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
To: Joel.Becker@oracle.com,
Tim Connors <tconnors+linuxkml@astro.swin.edu.au>,
Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>,
Clemens Schwaighofer <cs@tequila.co.jp>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Autotune swappiness01
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 08:32:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040727153229.GC2334@holomorphy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040727034739.GA2161@ca-server1.us.oracle.com>
On Mon, Jul 26, 2004 at 08:47:39PM -0700, Joel Becker wrote:
> I happen to be a person who rolls his eyes at everyone's mention
> of micro-optimized "feel". I've found that any system faster than
> 300MHz is pretty decent for normal desktop work (that is, moz + lots of
> terminals in gnome/kde). Yes, I'm a luddite, I used to wait 45 seconds
> for moz to start in the morning on the 300Mhz. I survived.
> In general, I can't notice the difference between 2.6.anything
> on my 1GHz. Maybe everyone else can, but I can't.
> HOWEVER, the swappiness of '60' puts my system into
> fits-and-starts mode. Not "It feels slower", but "It pauses for seconds
> at a time." So I chimed in on this.
> And yes, I'd give up oodles of pagecache to avoid fits and
> starts. But there's got to be a way to use the pagecache and not hang
> for seconds at a time.
I've had similar experiences except for the pauses. Could you identify
this as idle time, iowait, or cpu time (user/kernel)?
Also, does this behavior change at all as the IO scheduler varies? And
could you describe the system, e.g. IO devices/etc.?
-- wli
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-07-27 15:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-07-26 0:25 [PATCH][2.6.8-rc1-mm1] Autotune swappiness01 Con Kolivas
2004-07-26 0:36 ` Andrew Morton
2004-07-26 0:43 ` Con Kolivas
2004-07-26 0:48 ` Andrew Morton
2004-07-26 1:01 ` Con Kolivas
2004-07-26 1:09 ` Con Kolivas
2004-07-26 8:52 ` R. J. Wysocki
2004-07-26 9:31 ` Con Kolivas
2004-07-26 10:34 ` R. J. Wysocki
2004-07-26 10:29 ` Con Kolivas
2004-07-26 10:54 ` R. J. Wysocki
2004-07-26 11:03 ` Con Kolivas
2004-07-26 11:13 ` Nick Piggin
2004-07-26 11:17 ` Con Kolivas
2004-07-26 11:47 ` Nick Piggin
2004-07-26 13:53 ` R. J. Wysocki
2004-07-26 18:45 ` Adam Kropelin
2004-07-26 18:53 ` R. J. Wysocki
2004-07-26 17:55 ` Gerrit Huizenga
2004-07-26 20:29 ` Joel Becker
2004-07-26 20:42 ` Andrew Morton
2004-07-26 22:58 ` Con Kolivas
2004-07-27 0:52 ` Clemens Schwaighofer
2004-07-27 1:09 ` Andrew Morton
2004-07-27 1:17 ` Clemens Schwaighofer
2004-07-27 2:03 ` Tim Connors
2004-07-27 2:43 ` Con Kolivas
2004-07-27 3:02 ` Tim Connors
2004-07-27 3:43 ` Clemens Schwaighofer
2004-07-27 3:47 ` Joel Becker
2004-07-27 15:32 ` William Lee Irwin III [this message]
2004-07-27 3:41 ` Clemens Schwaighofer
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-07-26 14:52 Martin Knoblauch
2004-07-26 21:29 DaMouse
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=20040727153229.GC2334@holomorphy.com \
--to=wli@holomorphy.com \
--cc=Joel.Becker@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=cs@tequila.co.jp \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tconnors+linuxkml@astro.swin.edu.au \
/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