>BTW, it's really interesting to peek at the OpenAFS fileserver with >some of the dtrace tools. It's *very* fdsync happy, and seems to >spend a lot of time/resources syncing buffers to disk -- I wonder if >we could seriously increase performance here and let the OS write- >cache actually be one...
Whew, you ain't kidding. When I looked at that, I believe a lot of it was the link table. I have been idly thinking about simply removing most of those fsync() calls, or collapsing a whole bunch of them ... it would probably speed up operations like volume clones a whole lot. A few thought experiments made me think that perhaps the consequences of an incorrect link count aren't so catastrophic that that salvager couldn't easily recover from it ... but AFS has fooled me before, so I'm not convinced of that yet :-) --Ken _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
