Hi, More buffers makes sense... but i wonder what KIND of buffers those are. Only if they are disk buffers would the performance be increased.
Sincerely, Jason ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marcin Owsiany" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 5:37 PM Subject: Re: Finding the Bottleneck > On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 04:49:21PM +0800, Jason Lim wrote: > > Hi, > > > > AFAIK, even if there was a gig of ram in there, it would not allocate any > > (or maybe just a little) to free memory, and would throw any free memory > > into buffers anyway. > > > > So 68M of buffers tells me it has ample free memory, it or wouldn't > > allocate so much there anyway, right? > > Right, it probably would not allocate any more memory for the > processes themselves, but my point is that "the bigger buffers, > the better performance". I guess that 68 MB buffers isn't that > much for such a heavily loaded machine. > > Marcin > > PS: No need to CC to me. > -- > Marcin Owsiany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > http://student.uci.agh.edu.pl/~porridge/ > GnuPG: 1024D/60F41216 FE67 DA2D 0ACA FC5E 3F75 D6F6 3A0D 8AA0 60F4 1216 > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
