From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Oct 23 11:45:55 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23C8137B406 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 11:45:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [216.240.41.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3779D43E4A for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 11:45:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com) Received: from apollo.backplane.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by apollo.backplane.com (8.12.5/8.12.4) with ESMTP id g9NIjo78069932; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 11:45:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by apollo.backplane.com (8.12.5/8.12.4/Submit) id g9NIjogX069931; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 11:45:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 11:45:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Dillon Message-Id: <200210231845.g9NIjogX069931@apollo.backplane.com> To: David Schultz Cc: Peter Wemm , Sean Kelly , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: swapoff? References: <20020713115746.GA2162@HAL9000.wox.org> <200207131636.g6DGaoqh081285@apollo.backplane.com> <20021007153845.GA371@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <200210072347.g97Nl3Zo049415@apollo.backplane.com> <20021008113614.GA319@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <200210081745.g98Hjkam078883@apollo.backplane.com> <20021011130154.GA16549@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <200210111814.g9BIEbah040688@apollo.backplane.com> <20021014094217.GA228@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <200210141555.g9EFtoZh061812@apollo.backplane.com> <20021023180817.GA354@HAL9000.homeunix.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG This is looking really good. I'm going to start running it on my -current boxes. I think it could be committed after the 5.0 release rolls, as well as MFCd to -stable (which I would be happy to do the work for). -Matt Matthew Dillon :No, I've tested it extensively, and I haven't been able to :reproduce the problem since I updated my sources. (It was hard to :reproduce beforehand.) I did two more runs with one swap device :and two runs with two swap devices, and it worked even when the :system was thrashing. : :The latest patches are at : : http://www.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU/~das/swapoff.patch4 : :Performance is now much better when there are multiple swap :devices. Instead of effectively having to wait for each hash :chain to become quiescent, swapoff now skips busy objects, then :does a complete rescan if it missed anything. Only a few rescans :are required, even with multiple active swap devices. :A clustering optimization might still be worthwhile, but that can :be done another day. : :(Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I've been too busy :and sick for the last week to work on this.) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message