On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 3:57 AM Shakeel Butt wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 5:37 AM Chunxin Zang
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 6:42 PM Chris Down wrote:
> > >
> > > Chunxin Zang writes:
> > > >On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 5:51 PM Chris Down wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Chunxin Zang
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 8:43 PM Chris Down wrote:
>
> Chunxin Zang writes:
> >Please forgive me for not being able to understand why setting
> >memory.low for Type_A can solve the problem.
> >In my scene, Type_A is the most important, so I will set 100G to memory.low.
> >But 'memory.low' only
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 5:37 AM Chunxin Zang wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 6:42 PM Chris Down wrote:
> >
> > Chunxin Zang writes:
> > >On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 5:51 PM Chris Down wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Chunxin Zang writes:
> > >> >My usecase is that there are two types of services in one
Chunxin Zang writes:
Please forgive me for not being able to understand why setting
memory.low for Type_A can solve the problem.
In my scene, Type_A is the most important, so I will set 100G to memory.low.
But 'memory.low' only takes effect passively when the kernel is
reclaiming memory. It
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 6:42 PM Chris Down wrote:
>
> Chunxin Zang writes:
> >On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 5:51 PM Chris Down wrote:
> >>
> >> Chunxin Zang writes:
> >> >My usecase is that there are two types of services in one server. They
> >> >have difference
> >> >priorities. Type_A has the
Chunxin Zang writes:
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 5:51 PM Chris Down wrote:
Chunxin Zang writes:
>My usecase is that there are two types of services in one server. They
>have difference
>priorities. Type_A has the highest priority, we need to ensure it's
>schedule latency、I/O
>latency、memory
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 5:51 PM Chris Down wrote:
>
> Chunxin Zang writes:
> >My usecase is that there are two types of services in one server. They
> >have difference
> >priorities. Type_A has the highest priority, we need to ensure it's
> >schedule latency、I/O
> >latency、memory enough. Type_B
On Tue 22-09-20 16:06:31, Yafang Shao wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:27 PM Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > What is the latency triggered by the memory reclaim? It should be mostly
> > a clean page cache right as drop_caches only drops clean pages. Or is
> > this more about [id]cache? Do you
Chunxin Zang writes:
My usecase is that there are two types of services in one server. They
have difference
priorities. Type_A has the highest priority, we need to ensure it's
schedule latency、I/O
latency、memory enough. Type_B has the lowest priority, we expect it
will not affect
Type_A when
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 7:05 PM Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> On Mon 21-09-20 18:55:40, Yafang Shao wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 4:12 PM Michal Hocko wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon 21-09-20 16:02:55, zangchun...@bytedance.com wrote:
> > > > From: Chunxin Zang
> > > >
> > > > In the cgroup v1, we
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:27 PM Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> On Tue 22-09-20 12:20:52, Yafang Shao wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 7:36 PM Michal Hocko wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon 21-09-20 19:23:01, Yafang Shao wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 7:05 PM Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
On Tue 22-09-20 12:20:52, Yafang Shao wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 7:36 PM Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > On Mon 21-09-20 19:23:01, Yafang Shao wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 7:05 PM Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon 21-09-20 18:55:40, Yafang Shao wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Sep 21,
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 7:36 PM Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> On Mon 21-09-20 19:23:01, Yafang Shao wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 7:05 PM Michal Hocko wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon 21-09-20 18:55:40, Yafang Shao wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 4:12 PM Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 1:05 AM wrote:
>
> From: Chunxin Zang
>
> In the cgroup v1, we have 'force_mepty' interface. This is very
> useful for userspace to actively release memory. But the cgroup
> v2 does not.
>
> This patch reuse cgroup v1's function, but have a new name for
> the interface.
On Mon 21-09-20 19:23:01, Yafang Shao wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 7:05 PM Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > On Mon 21-09-20 18:55:40, Yafang Shao wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 4:12 PM Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon 21-09-20 16:02:55, zangchun...@bytedance.com wrote:
> > > > >
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 7:05 PM Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> On Mon 21-09-20 18:55:40, Yafang Shao wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 4:12 PM Michal Hocko wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon 21-09-20 16:02:55, zangchun...@bytedance.com wrote:
> > > > From: Chunxin Zang
> > > >
> > > > In the cgroup v1, we
On Mon 21-09-20 18:55:40, Yafang Shao wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 4:12 PM Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > On Mon 21-09-20 16:02:55, zangchun...@bytedance.com wrote:
> > > From: Chunxin Zang
> > >
> > > In the cgroup v1, we have 'force_mepty' interface. This is very
> > > useful for userspace to
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 4:12 PM Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> On Mon 21-09-20 16:02:55, zangchun...@bytedance.com wrote:
> > From: Chunxin Zang
> >
> > In the cgroup v1, we have 'force_mepty' interface. This is very
> > useful for userspace to actively release memory. But the cgroup
> > v2 does not.
>
Michal Hocko writes:
On Mon 21-09-20 16:02:55, zangchun...@bytedance.com wrote:
From: Chunxin Zang
In the cgroup v1, we have 'force_mepty' interface. This is very
useful for userspace to actively release memory. But the cgroup
v2 does not.
This patch reuse cgroup v1's function, but have a
On Mon 21-09-20 16:02:55, zangchun...@bytedance.com wrote:
> From: Chunxin Zang
>
> In the cgroup v1, we have 'force_mepty' interface. This is very
> useful for userspace to actively release memory. But the cgroup
> v2 does not.
>
> This patch reuse cgroup v1's function, but have a new name for
From: Chunxin Zang
In the cgroup v1, we have 'force_mepty' interface. This is very
useful for userspace to actively release memory. But the cgroup
v2 does not.
This patch reuse cgroup v1's function, but have a new name for
the interface. Because I think 'drop_cache' may be is easier to
21 matches
Mail list logo
