From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
To: Nigel Cunningham <ncunningham@linuxmail.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use extents for recording what swap is allocated.
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 00:19:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061024221950.GB5851@elf.ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1161728153.22729.22.camel@nigel.suspend2.net>
Hi!
> > > > Switch from bitmaps to using extents to record what swap is allocated;
> > > > they make more efficient use of memory, particularly where the allocated
> > > > storage is small and the swap space is large.
> > >
> > > As I said before, I like the overall idea, but I have a bunch of
> > > comments.
> >
> > Okay, if Rafael likes it... lets take a look.
> >
> > First... what is the _worst case_ overhead? AFAICT extents are very
> > good at the best case, but tend to suck for the worst case...?
>
> That's right. In using this, we're relying on the fact that the swap
> allocator tries to act sensibly. I've only seen worse case performance
> when a user had two swap devices with the same priority (striped), but
> that was a bug. :)
Ok, but if the allocator somehow manages to stripe between two swap
devices, what happens?
IIRC original code was something like .1% overhead (8bytes per 4K, or
something?), bitmaps should be even better. If it is 1% in worst case,
that's probably okay, but it would be bad if it had overhead bigger
than 10times original code (worst case).
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-24 22:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-10-23 4:14 Nigel Cunningham
2006-10-23 15:32 ` Pavel Machek
2006-10-23 23:04 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-10-24 8:43 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-10-24 20:08 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-10-24 21:34 ` Pavel Machek
2006-10-24 21:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-10-24 22:15 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-10-24 22:19 ` Pavel Machek [this message]
2006-10-24 22:30 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-10-25 8:11 ` Pavel Machek
2006-10-25 8:28 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-10-25 8:42 ` Pavel Machek
2006-10-25 9:01 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-10-25 9:10 ` Pavel Machek
2006-10-25 10:05 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-10-25 12:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-10-27 11:37 ` Pavel Machek
2006-10-24 22:13 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-10-24 22:45 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-10-24 23:05 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-10-31 11:39 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-10-24 20:42 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-10-24 20:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-10-24 22:06 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-10-24 22:47 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-10-24 23:03 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-10-25 9:17 ` Jens Axboe
2006-10-25 10:07 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-10-25 10:20 ` Jens Axboe
2006-10-31 11:38 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-11-01 12:36 ` Pavel Machek
2006-11-01 21:19 ` Nigel Cunningham
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20061024221950.GB5851@elf.ucw.cz \
--to=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ncunningham@linuxmail.org \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®