Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] fadvise: implement POSIX_FADV_NOREUSE

[Arun Sharma]

On 2/16/12 10:57 AM, Andrea Righi wrote:

> Maybe we should try to push ...something... in the memcg code for the
> short-term future, make it as much generic as possible, and for the
> long-term try to reuse the same feature (totally or in part) in the
> per-fd approach via fadvise().

Yes - the two approaches are complementary and we should probably pursue 
both.

There are a number of apps which are already using fadvise though:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-3289
http://highscalability.com/blog/2012/1/12/peregrine-a-map-reduce-framework-for-iterative-and-pipelined.html

and probably many other similar cases that are not open source.

Some of these apps may be better off using NOREUSE instead of DONTNEED, 
since they may not have a clue on what else is going on in the system.

The way I think about it: NOREUSE is a statement about what my process 
is doing and DONTNEED is a statement about the entire system.

 -Arun
--
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/