On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 01:00:28PM -0200, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > Other tasks tend not to stress the dcache like updatedb does,
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > leading to the effect that updatedb can "flush out" the other
> > cached values faster than the other processes reference them.
> >
> > This is something no amount of 2nd chance replacement or even
> > aging can prevent.
>
> Your arguments are senseless.
I could say the same of yours if I let myself
sink to that level ;) </obflamebait>
> The dcache aging is mostly useful with _high_ VFS load like
> updatedb in background. The logic is the same of the VM aging
> (ask yourself when the VM aging is most useful: when there's
> high VM load, like a `cp /dev/zero .`
This is exactly the point where page aging alone isn't good
enough and you need something like drop-behind...
(yes, there IS a reason why we have drop_behind() and page
deactivation in generic_file_write)
regards,
Rik
--
Hollywood goes for world dumbination,
Trailer at 11.
http://www.surriel.com/
http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com.br/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
