Re: experiences beyond 4 GB RAM with 2.4.22

[Marcelo Tosatti]

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Olivier Galibert wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 07:10:57PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Hi!
> > 
> > > > Well, I do understand the bounce buffer problem, but honestly the current way
> > > > of handling the situation seems questionable at least. If you ever tried such a
> > > > system you notice it is a lot worse than just dumping the additional ram above
> > > > 4GB. You can really watch your network connections go bogus which is just
> > > > unacceptable. Is there any thinkable way to ommit the bounce buffers and still
> > > > do something useful with the beyond-4GB ram parts?
> > > 
> > > The 2.6 tree is somewhat better about this but at the end of the day if
> > > your I/O subsystem can't do the job your box will not perform ideally.
> > > For some workloads its a huge win to have the extra RAM, for others the
> > > I/O is a real pain. 
> > 
> > If he has trouble logging in, then there's a bug somewhere.
> > Bounce buffers should not slow machine down more than
> > 2x, and from his description it looks like way worse slowdown. 
> 
> The box does not just slowdown, the box crawls on the floor wimpering.
> Nothing works except ping until the i/os are finished (and they seem
> to crawl too), then everything works perfectly again.
> 
> We're quite eager to fix the problem too, if you want us to test some
> things.

Which card and driver are you using for IO? 3ware?

How much RAM do you have?

I remember I tested heavy IO loads (heavy swapping and dbench) on 8GB
machine and all worked fine (interactive terminal, etc) but that was a
looong time ago back in 2.4.







-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/