[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFx4PzugV+wOKRqMEwo8XJ1QxP8r+s-mvn6H064FROnKdQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 12:29:32 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc: Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org>, linux-aio@...ck.org,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/13] aio: enabled thread based async fsync
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 11:59 AM, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> wrote:
>>
>> Are there other users outside of Solace? It would be good to get comments..
>
> I know of quite a few storage/db products that use AIO. The most
> recent high profile project that have been reporting issues with AIO
> on XFS is http://www.scylladb.com/. That project is architected
> around non-blocking AIO for scalability reasons...
I was more wondering about the new interfaces, making sure that the
feature set actually matches what people want to do..
That said, I also agree that it would be interesting to hear what the
performance impact is for existing performance-sensitive users. Could
we make that "aio_may_use_threads()" case be unconditional, making
things simpler?
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists