Hello!
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 04:35:26PM +0100, Aurelien Degremont wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >Not sure it is relevant, but there was also some discussion about an
> >fseek glibc optimisation last year :
> >http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/2/28/187
> >"Drastic Slowdown of 'fseek()' Calls From 2.4 to 2.6 -- VMM Change?"
> This is perfectly relevant because it seems Reiser hit exactly the same
> issue with ReiserFS (the value jumped from 4K in 2.4 to 128K in 2.6).
In reiserfs the problem was only reported about slow kmail speed, I think.
Also as I remember, at the time decision was that i_blksiz has nothing to do
about reads, actually. It is just a hint for WRITEs to show optimal write
size to avoid partial block writes (and associated speed penalties).
Too bad glibc now adopted this bad practice.
Perhaps somebody can file a bug with glibc people?
Bye,
Oleg
_______________________________________________
Lustre-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-devel
