linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jonathan Morton <chromi@cyberspace.org>
To: "Martin.Knoblauch" <Martin.Knoblauch@TeraPort.de>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: VM: Buffer vs. Cache
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 13:10:53 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <l0313032ab74670af4963@[192.168.239.105]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3B20B5B1.D659489F@TeraPort.de>

> just being curious. Since 2.4.4, I am watching my systems memory
>behaviour a bit:-) Just recently I realized the following: in the
>evening I leave my 128MB system at about 20 MB, 2 MB Buffered and 100 MB
>Cached (plus som 40 MB unneccesary swap :-)). When I come back in the
>morning, Used is still at 20 MB (a bit down maybe) but Buffered is 50 MB
>and Cached is 55 MB. For a few minutes the system is definitely more
>sluggish than in the evening. Something I can excuse before my first cup
>of coffe anyway...
>
> So, what actually is the difference between Buffered and Cached.
>Apparently quite a lot of the pages that are Cached in the evening are
>Buffered 9 houres later.

Think about what happens in the meantime.  Most distros install maintenance
scripts which run late at night (usually at midnight and/or 4am), which
perform heavy disk activity as they update databases and scan for
file-permissions security holes.  Heavy disk activity usually means an
increase in buffer utilisation.  Since most files are only "touched" once,
the cache is shrunk as it aren't being used very much.

--------------------------------------------------------------
from:     Jonathan "Chromatix" Morton
mail:     chromi@cyberspace.org  (not for attachments)

The key to knowledge is not to rely on people to teach you it.

GCS$/E/S dpu(!) s:- a20 C+++ UL++ P L+++ E W+ N- o? K? w--- O-- M++$ V? PS
PE- Y+ PGP++ t- 5- X- R !tv b++ DI+++ D G e+ h+ r++ y+(*)



  reply	other threads:[~2001-06-08 12:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-06-08 11:23 VM: Buffer vs. Cache Martin.Knoblauch
2001-06-08 12:10 ` Jonathan Morton [this message]
2001-06-19  7:27   ` Martin.Knoblauch

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='l0313032ab74670af4963@[192.168.239.105]' \
    --to=chromi@cyberspace.org \
    --cc=Martin.Knoblauch@TeraPort.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).