Hi.
On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 22:07 +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> Thanks, Nigel.
> But I'm very sorry that the calculation in the patch was wrong.
>
> Would you give this new patch a run?
Sorry for my slowness. I just did
time find /usr/src | wc -l
again:
Without patch: 35.137, 35.104, 35.351 seco
On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 02:20:49PM +1100, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 09:57 +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 08:23:32AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 9 Jan 2007, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > The fastest and proba
Hi.
On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 09:57 +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 08:23:32AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 9 Jan 2007, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The fastest and probably most important thing to add is some readahead
> > > > smarts to directories ---
On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 08:23:32AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2007, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > >
> > > The fastest and probably most important thing to add is some readahead
> > > smarts to directories --- both to the htree and non-htree cases. If
> >
> > Here's is a quick hack
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> >
> > The fastest and probably most important thing to add is some readahead
> > smarts to directories --- both to the htree and non-htree cases. If
>
> Here's is a quick hack to practice the directory readahead idea.
> Comments are welcome, it's a fre
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 07:58:19AM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 08:35:55AM +0530, Suparna Bhattacharya wrote:
> > > Yeah, slowly-growing directories will get splattered all over the disk.
> > >
> > > Possible short-term fixes would be to just allocate up to (say) eight
> >
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 05:09:34PM -0800, Paul Jackson wrote:
> Jeff wrote:
> > Something I just thought of: ATA and SCSI hard disks do their own
> > read-ahead.
>
> Probably this is wishful thinking on my part, but I would have hoped
> that most of the read-ahead they did was for stuff that happ
Jeff wrote:
> Something I just thought of: ATA and SCSI hard disks do their own
> read-ahead.
Probably this is wishful thinking on my part, but I would have hoped
that most of the read-ahead they did was for stuff that happened to be
on the cylinder they were reading anyway. So long as their rea
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 02:59:52PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > Would e2fsck -D help? What kind of optimization
> > > does it perform?
> >
> > It will help a little; e2fsck -D compresses the logical view of the
> > directory, but it doesn't optimize the physical layout on disk at all,
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 07:58:19AM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
>
> The fastest and probably most important thing to add is some readahead
> smarts to directories --- both to the htree and non-htree cases. If
> you're using some kind of b-tree structure, such as XFS does for
> directories, prealloc
Hi!
> > Would e2fsck -D help? What kind of optimization
> > does it perform?
>
> It will help a little; e2fsck -D compresses the logical view of the
> directory, but it doesn't optimize the physical layout on disk at all,
> and of course, it won't help with the lack of readahead logic. It's
> po
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 02:41:47PM +0100, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
>
> Would e2fsck -D help? What kind of optimization
> does it perform?
It will help a little; e2fsck -D compresses the logical view of the
directory, but it doesn't optimize the physical layout on disk at all,
and of course, it
Theodore Tso wrote:
The fastest and probably most important thing to add is some readahead
smarts to directories --- both to the htree and non-htree cases. If
you're using some kind of b-tree structure, such as XFS does for
directories, preallocation doesn't help you much. Delayed allocation
ca
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 08:35:55AM +0530, Suparna Bhattacharya wrote:
> > Yeah, slowly-growing directories will get splattered all over the disk.
> >
> > Possible short-term fixes would be to just allocate up to (say) eight
> > blocks when we grow a directory by one block. Or teach the
> > direct
On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 01:15:42AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Jan 2007 09:55:26 +0100
> Willy Tarreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 09:39:42PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, 6 Jan 2007, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > > >
> > > > During ext
On 01/07/2007 10:15 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
Yeah, slowly-growing directories will get splattered all over the
disk.
Possible short-term fixes would be to just allocate up to (say) eight
blocks when we grow a directory by one block. Or teach the
directory-growth code to use ext3 reservations
On Sun, 7 Jan 2007 09:55:26 +0100
Willy Tarreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 09:39:42PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 6 Jan 2007, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > >
> > > During extremely high load, it appears that what slows kernel.org down
> > > more
> > >
17 matches
Mail list logo
