Re: Machine unresponsive with cache_lock: blocked on... message

["Steve O'Hara-Smith" <steve@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 22:42:49 -0700 (PDT)
Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> wrote:

> :36 is slightly better but one of the running applications was still
> massively :paged out after a few hours.
> :
> :I vote for setting vfs.vm_cycle_point to 40.
> :
> :-- 
> :Francois Tigeot
> 
>     Ok, so 36 or 40.  I'm a bit worried about using 40, but I think its
>     worth setting it to 40 for the release and seeing how it fares.
> People can always drop it down if weird situations crop up.
> 
>     Theoretically the normal paging hysteresis should be sufficient but
>     there is still a chance that the inactive queue can wind up too small
>     at 40.

	I'm running at 40 at the moment on this box with 1.5GB of RAM that
used to hardly touch swap but these days is often to be seen with 300Mb of
swap in use and 800Mb of inactive. I think I'd rather see the swap usage go
away and the inactive queue shorter. Adding up the vsz of all the processes
running gets me to about 1GB. It would be nice not to be using swap again.

	Raising the setting to 40 seems to have increased total swap usage
at the same time as reducing the tendency for things I use to be swapped
out in the morning - this puzzles me somewhat.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/