View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
jdong n00b
Joined: 01 Mar 2004 Posts: 41
|
Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 8:13 pm Post subject: Reiserfs and Compiling: HEAVY RAM usage + swapping?!? |
|
|
I've been trying out various filesystems recently, and last week it was reiser. Traditionally, I've been a 100% XFS fan, but I decided to "see the rest of the world".
Reiser feels faster than XFS when copying files, emerge sync'ing, and emerge searching.
(or so I thought).
Yesterday, I was emerging packages in the background, while writing a presentation in the foreground. I had Ximian OOo Impress and Firefox started. I temporarily ALT-TABbed to Firefox to research, and 30 secs later, when alt tabbing back, I noticed Impress was unusually SLOW to respond. It must've took 10 seconds to fully load my slide! (Mixed multi-picture)
Then, I pulled up a terminal, issued free -m.
Free reports 502 total, 322 used, 280 as buffer. However, it reports <b>120MB</b> of swap used!
Huh, that's strange. I issued it again. Swap usage is steadily climbing.
So, I decided to launch Thunderbird, to see how the cache reacts to heavier RAM demands. Amazingly, the 280MB stayed almost constant, dropped only a megabyte or 2, and SWAP kept rising. The kernel swapped out Impress and Thunderbird.
I turned off swap. The cache fell, and after it finished unswapping, the system behaved quite normally.
I remade the swap, turned it on again. The swap instantly starts to fill up.
I thought it must have been my kernel (2.6.7-gentoo-r11), but then I tried mm and ck kernels, they all acted the same way.
I was getting freaked out at this point, so I went on my Knoppix CD, re-formatted & reloaded XFS on my drives, and went back into Gentoo. I started the same emerge again.
Up to now, I can't reproduce the same issue XFS or ext3fs. free reports 450MB of 502 used, 320 as cache, and only 57MB of swap used. I have FF, Thunderbird, GAIM, KGPG, Impress, and emerge -uDv world going right now, and all my apps feel fast.
Anyone else have similar problems with Reiser? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jdgill0 Veteran
Joined: 25 Mar 2003 Posts: 1366 Location: Lexington, Ky -- USA
|
Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 4:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
I read the following somewhere, but can I can not think at this time where that might have been. I had posted this to a friend, and hence he sent it back to me ... the following was recent news.
Quote: | Continuing the earlier discussion about low latency and Ingo Molnar
[interview]'s voluntary kernel preemption patch [story], the conversation
moved onto the affect a filesystem can have on latency. Specifically, 2.6
maintainer Andrew Morton [interview] noted that ReiserFS was known to have
some latency issues in both the 2.4 and 2.6 Linux kernels, "resierfs: yes,
it's a problem. I 'fixed' it multiple times in 2.4, but the fixes ended up
breaking the fs in subtle ways and I eventually gave up." However, he did go
on to note, "actually, the 2.4 low-latency patch does still have some
reiserfs fixes, so it's probably better than reiserfs in 2.6." |
Could it be related to what I read above? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
radonsg Apprentice
Joined: 26 Jun 2004 Posts: 257 Location: Singapore
|
Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 7:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
jdong, which version of ReiserFS u using? Version3 or 4? I'm been using ReiserFS ver 3 for sometime, never experience your problem at all. High ram usage is common but my 1G swap was hardly utilised at all.
Code: | $ free
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 1035168 905896 129272 0 97304 543052
-/+ buffers/cache: 265540 769628
Swap: 1004020 0 1004020
|
_________________ Athlon64 3000+ on a MSI Neo2 Platinum (nVidia nForce3)
1 Sata Hitachi (HGST) 7K250
1 Sata Samsung SpinPoint
2 x 512MB TwinMos DDR400 Dual Channel
Geforce 5200 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John5788 Advocate
Joined: 06 Apr 2004 Posts: 2140 Location: 127.0.0.1
|
Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 7:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
radonsg wrote: | jdong, which version of ReiserFS u using? Version3 or 4? I'm been using ReiserFS ver 3 for sometime, never experience your problem at all. High ram usage is common but my 1G swap was hardly utilised at all.
Code: | $ free
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 1035168 905896 129272 0 97304 543052
-/+ buffers/cache: 265540 769628
Swap: 1004020 0 1004020
|
|
same here, i havent touched a bit of swap since first installing gentoo _________________ John5788 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|