| To: | Linux XFS <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: separate log and structure from user data device? |
| From: | pg_xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Peter Grandi) |
| Date: | Thu, 8 Jun 2006 15:15:39 +0100 |
| In-reply-to: | <20060608104242.I710447@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com> |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.58.0606051402410.18047@kurp.hut.fi> <8630.1149517148@ocs3.ocs.com.au> <20060606101258.B644608@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0606061553320.31122@kurp.hut.fi> <20060608104242.I710447@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
[ ... curious complaints about write performance ... ] >> /* O_DIRECT for "realtime" */ nathans> You don't need O_DIRECT for realtime these days. >> assert( (fid = open(pn, >> O_WRONLY|O_CREAT|O_DIRECT|O_SYNC|O_LARGEFILE)) != -1 ); nathans> Thats a shocking use of assert. :) Thats too kind :-). However, I am puzzled as you comment on 'O_DIRECT' but not on 'O_SYNC'. IIRC XFS performance, and in particular the strategy to used to allocate large extents, is based on hugely delayed flushing, and 'O_SYNC' would defeat that, resulting perhaps in the allocation of many small extents, and this might impact write speed too (more metadata writes). Is this plausible? [ ... ] |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | RE: separate log and structure from user data device?, Patrick Freeman |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | You linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com are not member (macosx-dev-jp ML), macosx-dev-jp-admin |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: separate log and structure from user data device?, Nathan Scott |
| Next by Thread: | Re: separate log and structure from user data device?, Nathan Scott |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |