On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, Neil Schemenauer wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 01:12:32PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > Your idea /heavily/ penalises libc and executable pages by aging them
> > more often than anonymous pages...
>
> I don't think I age anonymous pages any more than any other type
> of
On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 01:12:32PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> Your idea /heavily/ penalises libc and executable pages by aging them
> more often than anonymous pages...
I don't think I age anonymous pages any more than any other type of
page. Perhaps you are saying that shared pages should
On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 01:12:32PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
Your idea /heavily/ penalises libc and executable pages by aging them
more often than anonymous pages...
I don't think I age anonymous pages any more than any other type of
page. Perhaps you are saying that shared pages should
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, Neil Schemenauer wrote:
On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 01:12:32PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
Your idea /heavily/ penalises libc and executable pages by aging them
more often than anonymous pages...
I don't think I age anonymous pages any more than any other type
of page.
This patch adds page aging similar to what was in 2.0. The patch
is quite straight forward but I've had one lockup that I have
been unable to reproduce. I don't know if the lockup was caused
by my patch or was a test8 bug.
This patch is supposed to improve interactive performance,
especially
This patch adds page aging similar to what was in 2.0. The patch
is quite straight forward but I've had one lockup that I have
been unable to reproduce. I don't know if the lockup was caused
by my patch or was a test8 bug.
This patch is supposed to improve interactive performance,
especially
6 matches
Mail list logo
