:On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Rik van Riel wrote:
:> On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
:>
:> > Why do you apparently ignore the fact that page-out write-back
:> > performance is horribly crappy because it always starts out
:> > doing synchronous writes?
:>
:> Because it is fixed in the patch I ma
On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > Why do you apparently ignore the fact that page-out write-back
> > performance is horribly crappy because it always starts out
> > doing synchronous writes?
>
> Because it is fixed in the patch I mailed yes
On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Why do you apparently ignore the fact that page-out write-back
> performance is horribly crappy because it always starts out
> doing synchronous writes?
Because it is fixed in the patch I mailed yesterday?
regards,
Rik
--
"What you're running that pi
Why do you apparently ignore the fact that page-out write-back performance
is horribly crappy because it always starts out doing synchronous writes?
I pointed out previously in a private email that page_launder() must be
buggy as it stands now, you seem to have ignored that part (and the
test-pr
[MM TODO list, updated for october 2000]
---
Here is the TODO list for the new VM. The only thing
really needed for 2.4 is the OOM handler and a fix
for the highmem deadlock.
The page->mapping->flush() callback is really wanted
by the journaling filesystem folks.
The rest are mostly extra's tha
Hi,
Here is the TODO list for the new VM. The only thing
really needed for 2.4 is the OOM handler and the
page->mapping->flush() callback is really wanted by
the journaling filesystem folks.
The rest are mostly extra's that would be nice; these
things won't be pushed for inclusion except if it t
6 matches
Mail list logo
