On Sun, 2004-10-24 at 10:46 +0200, Jan Kesten wrote:
>
> Buffers: Relatively temporary storage for raw disk blocks
> ~ shouldn't get tremendously large (20MB or so)
> ~ Cached: in-memory cache for files read from the disk (the
> ~ pagecache). Doesn't include SwapCached
Yes.
> Ca
On Sun, 2004-10-24 at 10:46 +0200, Jan Kesten wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi all!
>
> |> I'm not sure but what do you mean when you say "Linux doesn't see
> |> the CPU cache."
>
> I think he meant that the CPU cache isn't directly accessible for linux
> as for an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi all!
|> I'm not sure but what do you mean when you say "Linux doesn't see
|> the CPU cache."
I think he meant that the CPU cache isn't directly accessible for linux
as for any other OS. It is inside the chip and there it stores recently
accessed memo
On Sun, 2004-10-24 at 12:32 +0530, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Friday 22 October 2004 04:53 pm, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > No, because Linux doesn't see the CPU cache. I'd bet my last
> > kopek that Paul is talking about:
>
> I'm not sure but wha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 22 October 2004 04:53 pm, Ron Johnson wrote:
> No, because Linux doesn't see the CPU cache. I'd bet my last
> kopek that Paul is talking about:
I'm not sure but what do you mean when you say "Linux doesn't see the CPU
cache."
On my Intel C
> > Buffers:138752 kB <<<
> > Cached: 326116 kB <<<
>
> Yes, that's exactly what I'm talking about.
If this is exactly what you are talking about,
the 'top' command, and the meminfo shows the same numbers.
It is the swap data that is currently in RAM.
On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 20:05, Paul Johnson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Eric Gaumer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 00:37, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > Kernel cache stores cached kernel data structures. So say you create a
> > process, a new task_
On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 12:37:10AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> OK, this is probably the most obvious question ever, but I just can't
> find it in Google or Wikipedia.
>
> Just what the heck is the difference between buffer and cache in terms
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Eric Gaumer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 00:37, Paul Johnson wrote:
>> OK, this is probably the most obvious question ever, but I just can't
>> find it in Google or Wikipedia.
>>
>> Just what the heck is the difference between
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Micheal Mukherji <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If I am not wrong, the standard OS terminology for it is "buffer
> cache".
I'm fairly sure that's not right, for reasons beyond redundant
terminology...
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No, because Linux doesn't see the CPU cache. I'd bet my last
> kopek that Paul is talking about:
>
> $ cat /proc/meminfo
> MemTotal: 1003760 kB
> MemFree: 89652 kB
> Buffers:138752 kB
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
You should use reply-to-list, not reply-to-all on mailing lists.
Also, please see http://ursine.dyndns.org/wiki/index.php?title=Top_Posting
Micheal Mukherji <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Buffer is a logical cache maintained by the operating system in
On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 04:23, Ron Johnson wrote:
>
> No, because Linux doesn't see the CPU cache. I'd bet my last
> kopek that Paul is talking about:
>
> $ cat /proc/meminfo
> MemTotal: 1003760 kB
> MemFree: 89652 kB
> Buffers:138752 kB <<<
> Cached: 32
On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 00:37, Paul Johnson wrote:
> OK, this is probably the most obvious question ever, but I just can't
> find it in Google or Wikipedia.
>
> Just what the heck is the difference between buffer and cache in terms
> of memory usage? What is each catagory used for?
Kernel buffer c
On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 17:52 +0530, Micheal Mukherji wrote:
> If I am not wrong, the standard OS terminology for it is "buffer
> cache". I think this is what Paul was trying to differentiate from the
> main "cache".
Sigh. The Linux kernel has *both* "buffers" and "cache" both of
which are allocate
If I am not wrong, the standard OS terminology for it is "buffer
cache". I think this is what Paul was trying to differentiate from the
main "cache".
Paul, please confirm.
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 07:13:17 -0500, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 17:17 +0530, Micheal Mukh
On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 17:17 +0530, Micheal Mukherji wrote:
> > No, because Linux doesn't see the CPU cache. I'd bet my last
> > kopek that Paul is talking about:
>
> Who said Linux sees CPU cache?
> He was asking the difference between the two.. or am I wrong?
Because Linux also has a "cache", a
> No, because Linux doesn't see the CPU cache. I'd bet my last
> kopek that Paul is talking about:
Who said Linux sees CPU cache?
He was asking the difference between the two.. or am I wrong?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAI
On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 16:26 +0530, Micheal Mukherji wrote:
> Buffer is a logical cache maintained by the operating system in the
> main memory while cache is actually a physical hardware that the cpu
> uses to decrease the effective memory access time.
>
> Buffer cache is used to store the most re
Buffer is a logical cache maintained by the operating system in the
main memory while cache is actually a physical hardware that the cpu
uses to decrease the effective memory access time.
Buffer cache is used to store the most recently accessed data from
disk(or what so ever), so that they dont ha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
OK, this is probably the most obvious question ever, but I just can't
find it in Google or Wikipedia.
Just what the heck is the difference between buffer and cache in terms
of memory usage? What is each catagory used for?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE
21 matches
Mail list logo
