xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: better perf and memory uage for xfs_fsr? Trivial patch against xfsto

To: Linda Walsh <xfs@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: better perf and memory uage for xfs_fsr? Trivial patch against xfstools-3.16 included...
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 08:39:11 +1100
Cc: xfs-oss <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <509C1653.7050906@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <509BAABF.3030608@xxxxxxxxx> <509C1653.7050906@xxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 12:30:11PM -0800, Linda Walsh wrote:
> FWIW, the benefit, probably comes from the read-file, as the written file
> is written with DIRECT I/O and I can't see that it should make a difference
> there.

Hmmm, so it does. I think that's probably the bug that needs to be
fixed, not so much using posix_fadvise....

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

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