Chris Mason wrote: >On Mon, 2002-05-06 at 17:21, Hans Reiser wrote: > > >>>I'd rather not put it back in because it adds yet another corner case to >>>maintain for all time. Most of the fsync/O_SYNC bound applications are >>>just given their own partition anyway, so most users that need data >>>logging need it for every write. >>> >>> >>> >>Does mozilla's mail user agent use fsync? Should I give it its own >>partition? I bet it is fsync bound....;-) >> >> > >[ I took Wayne off the cc list, he's probably not horribly interested ] > >Perhaps, but I'll also bet the fsync performance hit doesn't affect the >performance of the system as a whole. > I suspect that on my laptop, downloading emails is disk bound due to fsync().... I haven't measured it, but it "feels" that way.
> >Mostly, I feel this kind of tuning is a mistake right now. The patch is >young and there are so many places left to tweak...I'm still at the >stage where much larger improvements are possible, and a better use of >coding time. Plus, it's monday and it's always more fun to debate than >give in on mondays. > >-chris > > > > > > Needing more time to finish analyzing what is going on and what fixes it best is always a good reason to defer things.... Hans
