Re: [PATCH 004 of 11] md: Increase the delay before marking metadata clean, and make it configurable.

2006-05-08 Thread Neil Brown
On Tuesday May 2, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 03:30:19PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > > When a md array has been idle (no writes) for 20msecs it is marked as > > 'clean'. This delay turns out to be too short for some real > > workloads. So increase it to 200msec (the time to u

Re: [PATCH 004 of 11] md: Increase the delay before marking metadata clean, and make it configurable.

2006-05-01 Thread bert hubert
On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 03:30:19PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > When a md array has been idle (no writes) for 20msecs it is marked as > 'clean'. This delay turns out to be too short for some real > workloads. So increase it to 200msec (the time to update the metadata > should be a tiny fraction of t

Re: [PATCH 004 of 11] md: Increase the delay before marking metadata clean, and make it configurable.

2006-05-01 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Sun, 30 Apr 2006, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Generally I don't think we should be teaching the kernel to accept > pretend-floating-point numbers like this, especially when a) "delay in > milliseconds" is such a simple concept and b) it's so easy to go from float > to milliseconds in userspace.

Re: [PATCH 004 of 11] md: Increase the delay before marking metadata clean, and make it configurable.

2006-04-30 Thread Nick Piggin
Neil Brown wrote: On Sunday April 30, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: NeilBrown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: When a md array has been idle (no writes) for 20msecs it is marked as 'clean'. This delay turns out to be too short for some real workloads. So increase it to 200msec (the time to update th

Re: [PATCH 004 of 11] md: Increase the delay before marking metadata clean, and make it configurable.

2006-04-30 Thread Andrew Morton
Neil Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sunday April 30, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > NeilBrown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > When a md array has been idle (no writes) for 20msecs it is marked as > > > 'clean'. This delay turns out to be too short for some real > > > wo

Re: [PATCH 004 of 11] md: Increase the delay before marking metadata clean, and make it configurable.

2006-04-30 Thread Neil Brown
On Sunday April 30, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > NeilBrown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > When a md array has been idle (no writes) for 20msecs it is marked as > > 'clean'. This delay turns out to be too short for some real > > workloads. So increase it to 200msec (the time to update the m

Re: [PATCH 004 of 11] md: Increase the delay before marking metadata clean, and make it configurable.

2006-04-30 Thread Andrew Morton
NeilBrown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > When a md array has been idle (no writes) for 20msecs it is marked as > 'clean'. This delay turns out to be too short for some real > workloads. So increase it to 200msec (the time to update the metadata > should be a tiny fraction of that) and make it

[PATCH 004 of 11] md: Increase the delay before marking metadata clean, and make it configurable.

2006-04-30 Thread NeilBrown
When a md array has been idle (no writes) for 20msecs it is marked as 'clean'. This delay turns out to be too short for some real workloads. So increase it to 200msec (the time to update the metadata should be a tiny fraction of that) and make it sysfs-configurable. Signed-off-by: Neil Brown <[