| 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> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: xfs_repair no modify output, Dave Chinner |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH v5 2/4]xfs: Introduce a new function to find the desired type of offset from page cache, Dave Chinner |
| Previous by Thread: | followup on benchmarks of an xfs embedded system (without rt section), Jason Newton |
| Next by Thread: | Re: followup on benchmarks of an xfs embedded system (without rt section), Stewart Smith |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |