On 09/28/2009 05:39 AM, Tobias Oetiker wrote:
Hi Daniel,
Today Daniel J Blueman wrote:
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 9:17 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Tobias Oetiker:
Running this on a single disk, I get the quite acceptable results.
When running on-top of a Areca HW Raid6 (lvm
Hi Ric,
Today Ric Wheeler wrote:
> I would be more suspicious of the barrier/flushes being issued. If your write
> cache is non-volatile, we really do not want to send them down to this type of
> device. Flushing this type of cache could certainly be very, very expensive
> and slow.
>
> Try "moun
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 09:25:38AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 08:18:22AM +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 09:35:43AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > > > Every yum activity is very slow, like 15 minutes for installation of 11
> > > > packages 25MB in size
wait_on_page_writeback_range/btrfs_wait_on_page_writeback_range takes
a pagecache offset, not a byte offset into the file. Shift the arguments
around to wait for the correct range
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
Index: linux-2.6/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
==
Use filemap_fdatawrite_range and filemap_fdatawait_range instead of
local copies of the functions. For filemap_fdatawait_range that
also means replacing the awkward old wait_on_page_writeback_range
calling convention with the regular filemap byte offsets.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
Index:
