Re: broken VM in 2.4.10-pre9

[Jan Harkes]

What do you consider as good VM?

Because pages aren't 'aged' until there is swap allocated for them, your
kernel should actually work better if it has a lot of pages backed by
swap. The only thing is, we don't really make the right decision about
which pages to swap out, but that's just a detail.

IMHO. A large number of cached/active pages == good.

Jan

On Sun, Sep 16, 2001 at 12:43:35AM +0200, Peter Magnusson wrote:
> 2.4.7: good VM
> 2.4.8: not good
> 2.4.9: not good!!!++
> 2.4.10-pre4: quite ok VM, but put little more on the swap than 2.4.7
> 2.4.10-pre8: not good
> 2.4.10-pre9: not good ... Linux didnt had used any swap at all, then i
>              unrared two very large files at the same time. And now 104
>              Mbyte swap is used! :-( 2.4.7 didnt do like this.
>              Best is to use the swap as little as possible.
> 
> My cfg:
> 
> Real mem: 512684K (512 Mbyte)
> Swap    : 257032K
> compiled with: gcc version 2.96 20000731 (Linux-Mandrake 8.0 2.96-0.48mdk)