Did you consider making this ratio tunable, at least manually(i.e. via sysctl)? I suppose we are not the only ones with almost-whole-ram-mmaped workload. 09.04.2012, 22:56, "Rik van Riel" <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>: > On 04/09/2012 01:11 PM, Alexey Ivanov wrote: > >> Thanks for the hint! >> >> Can anyone clarify the reason of not using zone->inactive_ratio in inactive_file_is_low_global()? > > New anonymous pages start out on the active anon list, and > are always referenced. If memory fills up, they may end > up getting moved to the inactive anon list; being referenced > while on the inactive anon list is enough to get them promoted > back to the active list. > > New file pages start out on the INACTIVE file list, and > start their lives not referenced at all. Due to readahead > extra reads, many file pages may never be referenced. > > Only file pages that are referenced twice make it onto > the active list. > > This means the inactive file list has to be large enough > for all the readahead buffers, and give pages enough time > on the list that frequently accessed ones can get accessed > twice and promoted. > > http://linux-mm.org/PageReplacementDesign > > -- > All rights reversed -- Alexey Ivanov Yandex Search Admin Team -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>