Re: [RFC] Arch option to touch newly allocated pages

Benjamin LaHaise
2002-03-06T16:37:00Z

On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 04:24:17PM +0100, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> On March 6, 2002 04:24 pm, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 03:59:22PM +0100, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > > Suppose you have 512 MB memory and an equal amount of swap. You start 8
> > > umls with 64 MB each. With your and Peter's suggestion, the system always
> > > goes into swap. Whereas if the memory is only allocated on demand it
> > > probably doesn't.
> >
> > As I said previously, going into swap is preferable over randomly killing
> > new tasks under heavy load.
>
> Huh? In the example I gave, you will never oom but with your suggestion, you
> will always go needlessly go into swap. I'm suprised that you and Peter are
> aguing in favor of wasting resources.

I'm arguing in favour of predictable behaviour. Stability and reliability
are more important than a bit of swap space.

-ben
--
"A man with a bass just walked in,
and he's putting it down
on the floor."