it would involve a semantic change but we could start flushing changes in
the background before fsync. there are of course potential issues.

On 9/24/07, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Adam Megacz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I've noticed that when writing really large files with something like
> > "cat .. | gzip > /afs/file" on a machine with a very large cache manager
> > cache, several hundred megabytes of data can accumulate locally before
> > being written back when close() is called.  In some cases, this can lead
> > to write() calls being quite fast, but the final close() call takes an
> > hour or more to return.  We (hcoop) would like to avoid this situation
> > if possible.
>
> > I assume that this amount of "unwritten" data cannot exceed the size of
> > the cache -- and I guess if this happens, the application is blocked
> > until enough StoreData's have happened to free up cache space.  Is there
> > any way to get the CM to start this throttling earlier on?  Say, for
> > example, when the amount of unwritten data reaches 50MB?  Unfortunately
> > setting the cache size to 50MB is not an option -- this machine performs
> > other tasks as well.
>
> Can you convince your application to call fsync periodically?  If so,
> that's the fastest and easiest solution.  fsync will write the data back
> to the server.
>
> --
> Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED])             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenAFS-info mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
>

Reply via email to