[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071116112841.GS3966@webber.adilger.int>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 04:28:41 -0700
From: Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Abhishek Rai <abhishekrai@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ken Chen <kenchen@...gle.com>,
Mike Waychison <mikew@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Clustering indirect blocks in Ext3
On Nov 15, 2007 23:02 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> So we have a section of blocks around the middle of the blockgroup which
> are used for indirect blocks.
>
> Presmably it starts around 50% of the way into the blockgroup?
>
> An important question is: how does it stand up over time? Simply laying
> files out a single time on a fresh fs is the easy case. But what happens
> if that disk has been in continuous create/delete/truncate/append usage for
> six months?
In the ext4-devel discussion, I asked about placement of the reserved
blocks. Placement at the beginning of the group showed at worst
marginally less performance and in some cases better performance.
I suspect putting the reserved blocks at the beginning of the group
would have a better long-term effect on performance because they are
not in the middle of large contiguous allocations in the middle of
the group.
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Sr. Software Engineer, Lustre Group
Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists