I don't think this is the right answer.  if the only solution to the problem
is to limit the amount of data used to cache file data, then people can only
have good interactive response if they limit themselves to a tiny amount of
cached data.  we should be able to have good performance with a larger cach=
e,
and this should be the default.

-Chuck


On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 03:01:39PM +0200, Jarom=7Fr Dolecek wrote:
> I'd probably preferred if the buffer cache would not touch text&data
> pages at all. In other words, that buffer cache would only use
> free, otherwise unused memory. It seems highly suboptimal for the page
> scanner to kick processes' data/text pages out of memory just to make
> more room for i/o buffers.
>=20
> I think there should be some minimal value of memory dedicated to
> buffer cache (i.e. what BUFCACHE/BUFPAGES does) and more memory
> would only be used if it's otherwise _unused at all_.
> Perhaps this might be an option, but such behaviour should be default IMH=
O.
>=20
> Jaromir
> --=20
> Jaromir Dolecek <jdolecek@NetBSD.org>      http://www.ics.muni.cz/~dolece=
k/
> NetBSD - just plain best OS! -=3D<>=3D- Got spare MCA cards or docs? Hand=
 me them!