Jan Kara wrote:
>>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>Hash: SHA1
>>
>>Jan Kara wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> just one note: I've looked to the in scan_bitmap() in bitmap.c. There is:
>>> /* When the bitmap is more than 10% free, anyone can allocate.
>>> * When it's less than 10% free, only files that already use the
>>> * bitmap are allowed. Once we pass 80% full, this restriction
>>> * is lifted.
>>> *
>>> * We do this so that files that grow later still have space
>>> * close to
>>> * their original allocation. This improves locality, and
>>> * presumably
>>> * performance as a result.
>>> *
>>> * This is only an allocation policy and does not make up for
>>> * getting a
>>> * bad hint. Decent hinting must be implemented for this to work
>>> * well.
>>> */
>>> if (TEST_OPTION(skip_busy, s)
>>> && SB_FREE_BLOCKS(s) > SB_BLOCK_COUNT(s) / 20) {
>>>
>>>
How about eliminating this feature entirely. It seems rather dubious.
>>> So the comment suggests we should lift the restriction when we are 80%
>>>full but if you see the condition, it checks wherher we are 95% full! I
>>>guess that is really asking for trouble and could explain the
>>>behaviour...
>>> Mike could you try changing that 20 in the test to 5? IMHO that could
>>>fix your problem.
>>>
>>>
>>Shoot. I guess I never sent that mail out last night. I had discovered
>>the same thing. The thing is, I don't think it will cause the kind of
>>performance problem we're seeing here. Once it sees the 90% check it
>>will bail out. Minor slowdown, not anything like we're seeing.
>>
>>
> Hmm, right. You'll only scan that one bitmap the file is in, won't
>
>
I don't understand your remark. These files are in many many
bitmaps.... Can you quote more of the code?
>you? That can still take some time so maybe it's worth trying this fix
>anyway.
>
> Honza
>
>
