From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 16:45:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 16:44:52 -0400 Received: from amadeus.resilience.com ([209.245.157.29]:14183 "HELO jmcmullan") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 16:44:40 -0400 Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 16:29:09 -0400 From: Jason McMullan To: Rik van Riel Cc: Jason McMullan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: What are the VM motivations?? Message-ID: <20010624162909.A25106@jmcmullan.resilience.com> In-Reply-To: <20010624145200.A14534@jmcmullan.resilience.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.15i In-Reply-To: ; from riel@conectiva.com.br on Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 04:29:09PM -0300 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 04:29:09PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote: > Over the last year there has been quite a bit of discussion > with Stephen Tweedie, Matt Dillon and more people. Parts of > it can be found on http://linux-mm.org/ > > The conclusion of most of this discussion is in my FREENIX > paper, which can be found at http://www.surriel.com/lectures/. [Just finished reading your paper, and hit the linux-mm.org site] Good overview of the Linux 2.4 VM. Although I do have some questions... * When was the 'FREENIX' paper published? I could find no date for it. * What workloads would you recommend for testing whether a VM is 'well balanced' or not? * Would it be reasonable to have different 'default' tunings for the kernel's VM based upon memory/swap size/bandwidth? Personally, I feel that swap bandwidth is an oft overlooked parameter in estimating VM performance. -- Jason McMullan, Senior Linux Consultant Linuxcare, Inc. 412.432.6457 tel, 412.656.3519 cell jmcmullan@linuxcare.com, http://www.linuxcare.com/ Linuxcare. Putting open source to work.