Re: nfs unhappiness with memory pressure

[Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>]

Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-12-06 at 14:36 +1100, Andrew Morton wrote:
> 
>>Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no> wrote:
>>
>>>Argh... Not sure entirely how to deal with that... We definitely don't
>>> want the thing futzing around inside throttle_vm_writeout(), 'cos
>>> writeout isn't going to happen while the socket blocks.
>>>
>>
>>As far as the core VM is concerned, these pages are really "dirty", only it
>>happens to be a different flavour of dirtiness.  So perhaps we should
>>continue to mark these pages as dirty and let NFS internally take care
>>of which end of the wire they're dirty at.
>>
>>Presumably calling writepage() a second time won't be very useful.  Or will
>>it?  Perhaps when NFS sees writepage against a PageDirty && PageUnstable
>>page it can recognise that as a hint to kick off a server-side write.
> 
> 
> Calling writepages() would actually be better. That will do the right
> thing, and trigger a commit if there are unstable writes.
> 

writepage should as well, then it would have a better chance
of just doing the right thing.

-- 
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.

Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com