4 ms·
>Only if you're constantly swapping in and out of swap. Which, in the experience I just gave, is what's happening. System memory at some high 90s percent utili
by Karunamon 5y ago
>Only if you're constantly swapping in and out of swap.
Which, in the experience I just gave, is what's happening. System memory at some high 90s percent utilization, swap usage creeping up, kswapd with a ton of CPU usage, and worst of all, UI chugging. If it wasn't 'actual' memory usage, why does dropping caches, instantly freeing up some amount of memory, restore responsiveness?
I've tried operating swapless before, but that just means OOM killer kicks in even when there's cache to evict. That seems like a priority inversion to me - of anything paged in, shouldn't cache have the absolute lowest priority, and be the first thing to go when memory's needed for other things?
- staticassertion 5y agoI agree that caches should get evicted more consistently.
- kaba0 5y agoI recommend using zram. It is a life changer for my 8GB laptop. I seriously never had trashing ever since.