Re: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue

2002-05-06 Thread Chris Mason
On Sat, 2002-05-04 at 10:59, Hans Reiser wrote: So how about if you revise fsync so that it always sends data blocks to the journal not to the main disk? This gets a little sticky. Once you log a block, it might be replayed after a crash. So, you have to protect against corner cases like

RE: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue

2002-05-06 Thread berthiaume_wayne
: Friday, May 03, 2002 6:00 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue On Fri, 2002-05-03 at 16:35, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chris, I have some quick preliminary results for you. I have additional testing

Re: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue

2002-05-06 Thread Hans Reiser
Chris Mason wrote: On Sat, 2002-05-04 at 10:59, Hans Reiser wrote: So how about if you revise fsync so that it always sends data blocks to the journal not to the main disk? This gets a little sticky. Once you log a block, it might be replayed after a crash. So, you have to protect

Re: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue

2002-05-06 Thread Chris Mason
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

Re: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue

2002-05-06 Thread Manuel Krause
On 05/07/2002 12:57 AM, 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

Re: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue

2002-05-06 Thread Chris Mason
On Mon, 2002-05-06 at 21:17, Manuel Krause wrote: On 05/07/2002 12:57 AM, Chris Mason wrote: Hi, Chris Hans! Don't think this somekind of destructive discussion would lead to anything useful for now, can you post a diff for 2.4.19-pre7+latest-related-pending +compound-patch-from-ftp?

Re: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue

2002-05-02 Thread Oleg Drokin
Hello! On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 07:07:18AM +0200, Christian Stuke wrote: Could we have this for 2.4.18+ pending also please? This patch would apply to 2.4.18 + pending patches, I believe. As for including these patchs into pending queue for 2.4.18, this is impossible now, it is too big of a

Re: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue

2002-05-01 Thread Christian Stuke
Could we have this for 2.4.18+ pending also please? Chris - Original Message - From: Oleg Drokin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 4:20 PM Subject: Re: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue Hello! On Fri, Apr 26, 2002

Re: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue

2002-04-30 Thread Oleg Drokin
Hello! On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 04:28:26PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm wondering if anyone out there may have some suggestions on how to improve the performance of a system employing fsync(). I have to be able to guaranty that every write to my fileserver is on disk when the

Re: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue

2002-04-30 Thread Chris Mason
On Tue, 2002-04-30 at 10:20, Oleg Drokin wrote: Attached is a speedup patch for 2.4.19-pre7 that should help your fsync operations a little. (From Chris Mason). Filesystem cannot do very much at this point unfortunatelly, it is ending up waiting for disk to finish write operations. Also

RE: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue

2002-04-30 Thread berthiaume_wayne
Thanks. I'll start putting this one into test. Wayne. -Original Message- From: Chris Mason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 10:28 AM To: Oleg Drokin Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue On Tue

Re: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue

2002-04-29 Thread Russell Coker
On Fri, 26 Apr 2002 22:28, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's interesting to note your email address and what it implies... I'm wondering if anyone out there may have some suggestions on how to improve the performance of a system employing fsync(). I have to be able to guaranty that every

Re: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue

2002-04-29 Thread Toby Dickenson
On Mon, 29 Apr 2002 18:20:18 +0200, Russell Coker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 26 Apr 2002 22:28, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's interesting to note your email address and what it implies... I'm wondering if anyone out there may have some suggestions on how to improve the performance

Re: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue

2002-04-29 Thread Chris Mason
On Mon, 2002-04-29 at 12:20, Russell Coker wrote: On Fri, 26 Apr 2002 22:28, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's interesting to note your email address and what it implies... I'm wondering if anyone out there may have some suggestions on how to improve the performance of a system

Re: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue

2002-04-29 Thread Chris Mason
On Mon, 2002-04-29 at 12:32, Toby Dickenson wrote: One thing that has occurred to me (which has not been previously discussed as far as I recall) is the possibility for using sync() instead of fsync() if you can accumulate a number of files (and therefore replace many fsync()'s with one

Re: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue

2002-04-29 Thread Matthias Andree
Toby Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: write to file A write to file B write to file C sync Be careful with this approach. Apart from syncing other processes' dirty data, sync() does not make the same guarantees as fsync() does. Barring write cache effects, fsync() only returns after all

RE: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue

2002-04-29 Thread berthiaume_wayne
- From: Chris Mason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 12:46 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Russell Coker; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue On Mon, 2002-04-29 at 12:32, Toby Dickenson wrote: One thing that has occurred

Re: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue

2002-04-29 Thread Valdis . Kletnieks
On Mon, 29 Apr 2002 19:56:59 +0200, Matthias Andree [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Barring write cache effects, fsync() only returns after all blocks are on disk. While I'm not sure if and if yes, which, Linux file systems are affected, but for portable applications, be aware that sync() may

Re: [reiserfs-list] fsync() Performance Issue

2002-04-29 Thread Hans Reiser
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 29 Apr 2002 19:56:59 +0200, Matthias Andree [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Barring write cache effects, fsync() only returns after all blocks are on disk. While I'm not sure if and if yes, which, Linux file systems are affected, but for portable applications, be