Re: page_launder() on 2.4.9/10 issue

From: Mike Fedyk (mfedyk@matchmail.com)
Date: Thu Sep 06 2001 - 12:35:53 EST


On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 03:18:27PM +0200, Kurt Garloff wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 10:03:03AM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > > On September 6, 2001 02:32 pm, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > > > Two words: "IO clustering".
> > >
> > > Yes, *after* the IO queue is fully loaded that makes sense. Leaving it
> > > partly or fully idle while waiting for it to load up makes no sense at all.
> > >
> > > IO clustering will happen naturally after the queue loads up.
> >
> > Exactly, so we need to give the queue some time to load
> > up, right ?
>
> Just use two limits:
> * Time: After some time (say two seconds), we can always afford to write it
> out
> * Queue filling: After it has a certain size, it's worth doing a writing.
>

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't these two settings tunable in bdflush?
If not, then how exactly does bdflush interact with this?
-
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/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 07 2001 - 21:00:36 EST