From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Ray Lee" <madrabbit@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/9] deadlock prevention core
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 09:53:54 -0700
Message-ID: <2c0942db0608190953r71ad8716vc2d11d9366894e40@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20060808211731.GR14627@postel.suug.ch>
	 <20060813215853.0ed0e973.akpm@osdl.org> <44E3E964.8010602@google.com>
	 <20060816225726.3622cab1.akpm@osdl.org> <44E5015D.80606@google.com>
	 <20060817230556.7d16498e.akpm@osdl.org> <44E62F7F.7010901@google.com>
	 <20060818153455.2a3f2bcb.akpm@osdl.org> <44E650C1.80608@google.com>
	 <20060818194435.25bacee0.akpm@osdl.org>
Reply-To: ray-gmail@madrabbit.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "Daniel Phillips" <phillips@google.com>,
	"Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	"David Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>, riel@redhat.com,
	tgraf@suug.ch, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, "Mike Christie" <michaelc@cs.wisc.edu>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.179]:32462 "EHLO
	py-out-1112.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1422711AbWHSQxz (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sat, 19 Aug 2006 12:53:55 -0400
Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id n25so1628198pyg
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Sat, 19 Aug 2006 09:53:54 -0700 (PDT)
To: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@osdl.org>
In-Reply-To: <20060818194435.25bacee0.akpm@osdl.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

On 8/18/06, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> wrote:
>   I assert that this can be solved by putting swap on local disks.  Peter
>   asserts that this isn't acceptable due to disk unreliability.  I point
>   out that local disk reliability can be increased via MD, all goes quiet.
>
>   A good exposition which helps us to understand whether and why a
>   significant proportion of the target user base still wishes to do
>   swap-over-network would be useful.

Adding a hard drive adds $low per system, another failure point, and
more importantly ~3-10 Watts which then has to be paid for twice (once
to power it, again to cool it). For a hundred seats, that's
significant. For 500, it's ranging toward fully painful.

I'm in the process of designing the next upgrade for a VoIP call
center, and we want to go entirely diskless in the agent systems. We'd
also rather not swap over the network, but 'swap is as swap does.'

That said, it in no way invalidates using /proc/sys/vm/min_free_kbytes...

Ray