Well, while it is not a great idea, it is better than what is going to
happen if you don't prevent them from writing, or if you let the write
buffer get so large going from the high to lower water mark takes too
long.
if you never stop the writes then eventually the kernel will oom.
And really about all of the default setting is it initially makes the
benchmarks look good. That is until the benchmark adds code to
correctly deal with not stopping the time until the write buffer is
synced/clear.
It is also not sane to let writes (that in a lot of cases you aren't
going to read again soon) force a machine to page because of the high
IO on a slow device allowing the write cache to page out pages that on
is going to reuse much sooner.
Maybe the system should have some code in the path to only allow so
many seconds of outstandings writes for a device. But given all of
the possible io paths to devices I don't think that is something that
is reasonable for anyone to code.
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 5:37 AM Roberto Ragusa <mail(a)robertoragusa.it> wrote:
>
> On 3/24/21 11:27 AM, John Mellor wrote:
> > With Fedora being intended as a desktop platform, why are these settings not the
default?
>
> Because they are ugly workarounds for something that is broken elsewhere.
>
> Seriously, telling the kernel that it should stop applications attempting to write to
files
> as soon as 0% of the RAM contains dirty buffers can't be considered a sane
setting.
>
> Regards.
>
> --
> Roberto Ragusa mail at robertoragusa.it
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list -- users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure