Re: How Inactive may be much greather than cached?

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Nick Piggin
Date: Thursday, October 18, 2007 - 12:27 am

On Thursday 18 October 2007 17:14, Vasily Averin wrote:

Ah, I didn't see it was an order of magnitude out.

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.
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
How Inactive may be much greather than cached?, Vasily Averin, (Wed Oct 17, 11:24 pm)
Re: How Inactive may be much greather than cached?, Nick Piggin, (Wed Oct 17, 11:27 pm)
Re: How Inactive may be much greather than cached?, Vasily Averin, (Thu Oct 18, 12:14 am)
Re: How Inactive may be much greather than cached?, Nick Piggin, (Thu Oct 18, 12:27 am)
Re: How Inactive may be much greather than cached?, Vasily Averin, (Thu Oct 18, 3:33 am)
Re: How Inactive may be much greather than cached?, Rik van Riel, (Thu Oct 18, 7:17 am)