Re: How Inactive may be much greather than cached?

2007-10-18 Thread Rik van Riel
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:27:00 +1000 Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Some filesystems, including I believe, ext3 with data=ordered, > can leave orphaned pages around after they have been truncated > out of the pagecache. These pages get left on the LRU and vmscan > reclaims them pretty easi

Re: How Inactive may be much greather than cached?

2007-10-18 Thread Vasily Averin
Nick Piggin wrote: > Some filesystems, including I believe, ext3 with data=ordered, > can leave orphaned pages around after they have been truncated > out of the pagecache. These pages get left on the LRU and vmscan > reclaims them pretty easily. > > Try ext3 data=writeback, or even ext2. thanks,

Re: How Inactive may be much greather than cached?

2007-10-18 Thread Nick Piggin
On Thursday 18 October 2007 17:14, Vasily Averin wrote: > Nick Piggin wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Thursday 18 October 2007 16:24, Vasily Averin wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> could anybody explain how "inactive" may be much greater than "cached"? > >> stress test (http://weather.ou.edu/~apw/projects/s

Re: How Inactive may be much greather than cached?

2007-10-18 Thread Vasily Averin
Nick Piggin wrote: > Hi, > > On Thursday 18 October 2007 16:24, Vasily Averin wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> could anybody explain how "inactive" may be much greater than "cached"? >> stress test (http://weather.ou.edu/~apw/projects/stress/) that writes into >> removed files in cycle puts the node to the

Re: How Inactive may be much greather than cached?

2007-10-17 Thread Nick Piggin
Hi, On Thursday 18 October 2007 16:24, Vasily Averin wrote: > Hi all, > > could anybody explain how "inactive" may be much greater than "cached"? > stress test (http://weather.ou.edu/~apw/projects/stress/) that writes into > removed files in cycle puts the node to the following state: > > MemTotal