Re: write drop behind effect on active scanning

2001-05-23 Thread Rik van Riel
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > I just noticed a "bad" effect of write drop behind yesterday during some > tests. > > The problem is that we deactivate written pages, thus making the inactive > list become pretty big (full of unfreeable pages) under write intensive IO > workloads. >

Re: write drop behind effect on active scanning

2001-05-23 Thread Marcelo Tosatti
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Daniel Phillips wrote: > On Wednesday 23 May 2001 09:33, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I just noticed a "bad" effect of write drop behind yesterday during > > some tests. > > > > The problem is that we deactivate written pages, thus making the > > inactive list bec

Re: write drop behind effect on active scanning

2001-05-23 Thread Daniel Phillips
On Wednesday 23 May 2001 09:33, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > Hi, > > I just noticed a "bad" effect of write drop behind yesterday during > some tests. > > The problem is that we deactivate written pages, thus making the > inactive list become pretty big (full of unfreeable pages) under > write intensi

write drop behind effect on active scanning

2001-05-23 Thread Marcelo Tosatti
Hi, I just noticed a "bad" effect of write drop behind yesterday during some tests. The problem is that we deactivate written pages, thus making the inactive list become pretty big (full of unfreeable pages) under write intensive IO workloads. So what happens is that we don't do _any_ aging