xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: followup on benchmarks of an xfs embedded system (without rt section

To: Jason Newton <nevion@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: followup on benchmarks of an xfs embedded system (without rt section)
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 08:11:05 +1000
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <CAGou9Mhz-ez5nnzVAoRbp-E93NqBjT-wgGyHvrLkC7jEzJBagw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <CAGou9Mhz-ez5nnzVAoRbp-E93NqBjT-wgGyHvrLkC7jEzJBagw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 03:35:40AM -0700, Jason Newton wrote:
> I've attached my benchmark program but I use alot of boost c++ with a
> little internal set of libraries... so you can see what I"m doing but it
> likely won't compile for you.  I'll also mention that boost is a very low
> overhead (if any) over all the normal system calls one would use (verified
> by reading sourcecode in use).

I'd suggest rewriting it so we can compile and run it. If I can
reproduce the problem, I can at least understand where the latency
is coming from.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>