On Thu, 26 Apr 2007, Nick Piggin wrote: > But I maintain that the end result is better than the fragmentation > based approach. A lot of people don't actually want a bigger page > cache size, because they want efficient internal fragmentation as > well, so your radix-tree based approach isn't really comparable.
Me? Radix tree based approach? That approach is in the kernel. Do not create a solution where there is no problem. If we do not want to support large blocksizes then lets be honest and say so instead of redefining what a block is. The current approach is fine if one is satisfied with scatter gather and the VM overhead coming with handling these pages. I fail to see what any of what you are proposing would add to that. Lets be clear here: A bigger page cache size if its just one is not useful. 4k page size is a good size for many files on the system and chaning it would break the binary format.. I just do not want it to be the only one because different usage scenarios may require differnet page sizes for optimal application performance. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
