On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 02:45:49PM -0500, Derek Glidden wrote:
>
> Ok guys, here's that work I've been talking about:
>
> "An analysis of three Linux kernel VM systems"
>
> http://www.nks.net/linux-vm.html
>
> Paul, of the most interest to you, the conclusion in a nutshell is that
> yes, the 2.4 kernel VM systems still have a few quirks to work out, but
> overall they are so significantly better than the 2.2 VM that there
> really is no comparison.
>
> However, this "significantly better" conclusion is for certain
> high-stress situations where the 2.2 VM will fail entirely, while 2.4
> chugs along with barely a notice.
>
> For overall end-user experience, 2.2 still "feels" better overall with
> better interactive responsiveness under a varying set of loads even
> though 2.4 really is faster at doing the actual work.
>
That's definitely been my experience. The 2.4.7 I've got (Rik VM) is
definitely sluggish in many many situations. The previous 2.2 was
usually snappy.
I'm inclined to agree with Linus overall about the AA VM. Not because I
know anything, but 1) rewrites based on past experience _which actually
work_ are generally better than patching old code, 2) I've heard that
the AA VM is simpler in design, which is always a plus, and 3) I think
Linus is pretty sharp; if he likes it enough to drop it in, it's
probably okay. Not to detract from Alan Cox, who is also deeply gifted.
Alan tends to be more conservative.
Anyway, nice work Derek, as usual.
Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 16:31:52 EDT