HI Offer,

Unfortunately this is the way it works under z/Linux. Of course because
of the way z/VM tries to Share memory once memory for a z/Linux guest is
pushed into cache it is not considered when z/VM is trying to manage the
memory by taking from one to give to another, it limits z/VM in its'
memory management process. In Linux he sees having a bunch o f cache as
a good thing because he has use of the cache and allows in most cases
for better performance. So as you can see there is a conflict here. The
hope is that these types of conflicts including double paging due to the
same LRU approach used by both z/Linux and z/VM, as well as a way to
dynamically prioritize the workloads for not only z/VM but for processes
running in z/Linux can be resolved.

Anyway for now the best approach for the cache is to try to size the
memory of the z/Linux guest to where you just see a very small amount of
SWAPPING and make this SWAPPING go to VDISK. VDISK SWAPPING is a memory
speed in z/VM so it is very fast. This will set the behavior so that
z/Linux does not cache. I know from my own experiences that this is not
always an easy thing to nail down but for the most part I have been able
to balance this between the OSs'.      

Thank You,

Terry Martin
Lockheed Martin - Citic
z/OS and z/VM Performance Tuning and Operating Systems Support
Office - 443 348-2102
Cell - 443 632-4191


-----Original Message-----
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Offer Baruch
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 8:18 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Linux file system cache

Hi all,

One of the problems with Linux under VM (not just z/VM I guess) is that
no
matter how much memory you allocate to the guest it will consume it all
as
cache.
It just seems reasonable to be able to limit this cache to a user
defined
value leaving the rest of it for the applications.
Sadly I couldn't find a parameter to enforce this limit.
So, my question is, is there a way to limit the cache? If not, why?
Obviously this caching method is just not good enough under VM.
Decreasing and increasing memory for a guest is quite disruptive and
adding
100M to an oracle guest just looks bad :-)

Thanks!
Offer Baruch

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2680 - Release Date: 02/10/10
21:38:00

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or
visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Reply via email to