[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4CF3CCD3.8040608@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 09:54:59 -0600
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
To: Bernd Schubert <bernd.schubert@...tmail.fm>
CC: "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@...il.com>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bug#605009: serious performance regression with ext4
On 11/29/10 9:18 AM, Bernd Schubert wrote:
> On Monday, November 29, 2010, Ted Ts'o wrote:
>> By using sync_file_range() first, for all files, this forces the
>> delayed allocation to be resolved, so all of the block bitmaps, inode
>> data structures, etc., are updated. Then on the first fdatasync(),
>> the resulting journal commit updates all of the block bitmaps and all
>> of the inode table blocks(), and we're done. The subsequent
>> fdatasync() calls become no-ops --- which the ftrace shell script will
>> show.
>
> Wouldn't it make sense to modify ext4 or even the vfs to do that on close()
> itself? Most applications expect the file to be on disk after a close anyway
but those applications would be wrong.
http://www.flamingspork.com/talks/
Eat My Data: How Everybody Gets File IO Wrong
-Eric
> and I also don't see a good reason why one should delay a disk write-back
> after close any longer (well, there are exeption if the application is broken,
> for example such as ha-logd used by pacemaker, which did for each line of logs
> an open, seek, write, flush, close sequence..., but at least we have fixed
> that in -hg now).
>
>
> Cheers,
> Bernd
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists