best version for server?

From: Larry McVoy (lm@bitmover.com)
Date: Mon Oct 07 2002 - 10:01:32 EST

Next message: Jesse Pollard: "Re: The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (NUMA))"
Previous message: Trond Myklebust: "Re: [PATCH] AFS filesystem for Linux (2/2)"
Next in thread: FD Cami: "Re: best version for server?"
Reply: FD Cami: "Re: best version for server?"
Reply: Rik van Riel: "Re: best version for server?"
Reply: Gerhard Mack: "Re: best version for server?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

We're not sure if it is something we've done or just increased usage, but
bkbits.net is getting hammered lately. We see load averages in ~15-20
range pretty regularly. It's got some nasty characteristics from the
point of view of server/VM system, tons of data and not really any good
working sets. I'm running 2.4.5 on it and that clearly has to go. I am
going to try the rmap kernel but I'm open to other suggestions.

-- 
---
Larry McVoy            	 lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitmover.com/lm 
-
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/

Next message: Jesse Pollard: "Re: The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (NUMA))"
Previous message: Trond Myklebust: "Re: [PATCH] AFS filesystem for Linux (2/2)"
Next in thread: FD Cami: "Re: best version for server?"
Reply: FD Cami: "Re: best version for server?"
Reply: Rik van Riel: "Re: best version for server?"
Reply: Gerhard Mack: "Re: best version for server?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 07 2002 - 22:00:58 EST