[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120927021919.GJ15236@dastard>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 12:19:19 +1000
From: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To: Zhi Yong Wu <zwu.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
linuxram@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
cmm@...ibm.com, tytso@....edu, marco.stornelli@...il.com,
stroetmann@...olinux.com, diegocg@...il.com, chris@...muel.org,
Zhi Yong Wu <wuzhy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 02/10] vfs: add support for updating access frequency
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 10:53:07AM +0800, Zhi Yong Wu wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 08:56:27PM +0800, zwu.kernel@...il.com wrote:
> > I note that the code will always insert range items of a length
> > RANGE_SIZE. This means you have a fixed object granularity and hence
> > you have no need for a range based search. That is, you could use a
> > radix tree where each entry in the radix tree points directly to the
> > range object similar to how the page cache uses a radix tree for
> > indexing pages. That brings the possibility of lockless range item
> > lookups....
> Great suggestion, but can we temporarily put it in TODO list? because
> it will bring one big code change.
Sure. I just wanted to point out that there are better choices for
indexing fixed size elements than rb-trees and why it might make
sense to use a different type of tree.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com
--
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