hi Atin,
Based on my understanding of gluster, calls that affect performance
significantly are syscalls and over the network calls i.e. rpcs. IMO this
change should not cause performance changes.
But data speaks for itself, so I suggest you do the following:
Following is one of the perf-tests that we use whenever some performance
related change is introduced.
https://github.com/avati/perf-test/blob/master/perf-test.sh
Get the latest numbers on non-vms without the change (avg of 3 runs)
Introduce the change you are suggesting and do the same again and see for
yourself if there are any improvements. Post the numbers, if there are
improvements then the patch will be taken in :-), and from then on we can
follow this convention.
Pranith
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Atin Mukherjee" <amukh...@redhat.com>
> To: gluster-devel@nongnu.org
> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 12:35:14 PM
> Subject: [Gluster-devel] Can we replace strcpy calls with memcpy?
>
> Hi List,
>
> In GlusterFS codebase, strcpy() calls have been used in many places. IMO, if
> we can replace strcpy calls with memcpy() we would get a performance bonus
> as memcpy directly interacts with memory area. I am posting this suggestion
> based on my earlier project experience where we have seen a significant
> difference of performance with this replace.
>
> Please feel free to add if you think otherwise.
>
> Regards,
> Atin Mukherjee
> Senior Software Engineer
> E-9, Extn : 73196, Direct : 08039245196, Mobile: +919739491377
> Email - amukh...@redhat.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> Gluster-devel@nongnu.org
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>
_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
