On Sun, 4 Mar 2001, Ingo Oeser wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 01:03:26AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > If anybody as a good idea to make this code auto-balancing,
> > > please let me know.
> >
> > I have no idea for auto-balancing but another idea: It's one possibility
> > to let the user choose when doing "make *config" what he wants:
> >
> > - A VM optimized for servers that swaps out applications in favor of
> > caching.
> > or
> > - A VM optimized for workstations that won't swap out applications in
> > favor of caching.
>
> I thought about the same thing sometimes (but for other troughput
> vs. latency decisions, too).
>
> But I realized, that my very own workstation is also a server,
> since it runs an httpd, mysqld, smbd, ftpd etc.
>
> And somtimes the servers become very busy in our LAN[1].
>
> IF we want that tuning, we should have it as a sysctl. Most of it
> is already possible with /proc/sys/vm/*, but balancing decisions
> are still missing.
I think sysctls for balancing knobs is a great idea. The VM has no
clue concerning the cost of rebuilding cache eg but a human may.
Automatic tuning would be wonderful, but it requires information
which the VM flat doesn't have.. so it should ask the boss for help.
Three handy knobs I can think of off the top of my head are swap_size,
flush_size [for page_launder().. bdflush has that] and cache_stickiness.
-Mike
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Mar 07 2001 - 21:00:16 EST