>>Rik van Riel said:
>> The problem may well be that Oracle wants to clean up
>> all memory at once, accessing much more memory than
>> it did while under stress with more tricky access
>> patterns.
>> <SNIP>
>> If this looks bad to you, compare the points where 2.2
>> starts thrashing and where 2.4 starts thrashing. You'll
>> most likely (there must be a few corner cases where 2.2
>> does better ;)) see that 2.4 still runs fine where 2.2
>> performance has already "degraded heavily" and that 2.2
>> has "hit the wall" before 2.4 does so ... the difference
>> just is that 2.4 hits the wall more suddenly ;)
>>
>Jonathan George said:
> It sounded to me as if his machine never actually recovered from thrashing.
> Futhermore, even a thrashing case on a machine like that shouldn't last for
> more than about 10 minutes. It would be interesting to contrast FreeBSD's
> behavior if "simple" cleanup was the problem. BTW, I think that everyone is
> happy with the direction of the new VM. I'm looking forward to your
> upcoming enhancements which I hope will make it in to a later 2.4 release.
The "thrashing" has been going on for roughly 10 hours now. Is there a
point at which I can expect it to stop? The load average is at 441 (down
from > 700 last night), and the stress program was killed at 1:00AM CST
last night. This (obviously) isn't an important machine so if you want me
to ride it out I will.
Matthew
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 07 2000 - 21:00:09 EST