Re: Fixing the vm or merging rmap into the official tree?

[Martin Knoblauch]

> Fixing the vm or merging rmap into the official tree?
> 
> From: Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk ([e-mail])
> Date: Thu Jan 10 2002 - 04:55:39 EST
> 
> 
> Hi all
> 
> After weeks of testing, knocking my head against all sorts of objects,
> trying out other potential OSes etc. etc. ad. infinitum, I got the hint of
> using the rmap patch to fix my problems with reading multiple large files
> at once (see prevois thread with subject "[BUG] Error reading multiple
> large files").
> 
> Will this problem be addressed in 2.4 or perhaps 2.[56] ?
> 
> My testing shows that the current vm can't handle high/non-standards load
> efficiently. Isn't this something that clearly should be addressed?
>

 Just my 2 EURO-ct on this. The VM in 2.4.x mainline is definitely
broken for a lot of loads, especially under high memory stress. This
needs to be adressed and fixed ASAP. An I think most people here agree.

 Now, the question is what is the correct fix. There is Andreasīs stuff,
which fixes some scenarios. There is Rick's stuff which fixes others.
There is even the small few liner patch to vmscan.c by M.v.Leuwen, which
fixes/reduces the swapout problem for *my* situation.

 But frankly speaking, I personally don't care which solution goes in,
but it should be done quick. Patching up mainline every time just to get
decent VM behaviour is unacceptable for serious use.

> roy
> 
> --
> Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk, MCSE, MCNE, CLS, LCA
------------------------^^^^^^^^^^

 poor guy :-)

Martin
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Knoblauch         |    email:  [e-mail]
TeraPort GmbH            |    Phone:  [phone]
C+ITS                    |    Fax:    [phone]
http://www.teraport.de   |    Mobile: [phone]