Re: [BUG] 2.4 VM sucks. Again

Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
2002-05-30T10:30:12Z

> > I don't think Andrew is ready to submit this yet ... before anything
> > gets merged back, it'd be very worthwhile testing the relative
> > performance of both solutions ... the more testers we have the
> > better ;-)
>
> Cripes no. It's pretty experimental. Andrea spotted a bug, too. Fixed
> version is below.

Works great! This should _definetely_ be merged into the main kernel after
som testing. Without it _all_ other kernels I've tested (2.4.lots) goes OOM
under the mentioned scenarios. This one simply does the job.

> It's possible that keeping the number of buffers as low as possible
> will give improved performance over Andrea's approach because it
> leaves more ZONE_NORMAL for other things. It's also possible that
> it'll give worse performance because more get_block's need to be
> done for file overwriting.

Andrea's patch merely pushed the problem forward. This one fixed it
--
Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk, Datavaktmester

Computers are like air conditioners.
They stop working when you open Windows.