On 12 January 2016 at 12:19, Pádraig Brady <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11/01/16 23:19, Francois wrote: >> On 11 January 2016 at 23:55, Pádraig Brady <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> syncing should be a very explicit thing and carefully considered. > Right. But didn't doing that take 300% more "sys" time, > while not providing much benefits over oflag=nocache,sync ? I thinks that's the deal: if you want to copy files in this fashion use nocache,sync. In our case, the nocache option alone is useless, and you really do want to consider syncing. Looking again at the benchmarks, we see that the nocache,sync option does seem to consume more memory (like ten times more) than the updated nocache option without sync. Might be worth to check how fadvise is implemented, and what's taking CPU time. (I make a post-it) Cheers!
