From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 24 03:14:26 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A03716A4CE; Sat, 24 Apr 2004 03:14:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.nsu.ru (mx.nsu.ru [212.192.164.5]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6B8643D2D; Sat, 24 Apr 2004 03:14:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from danfe@regency.nsu.ru) Received: from regency.nsu.ru ([193.124.210.26]) by mx.nsu.ru with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BHKFj-0002ig-CI; Sat, 24 Apr 2004 17:19:19 +0700 Received: from regency.nsu.ru (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by regency.nsu.ru (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i3OAElAT013822; Sat, 24 Apr 2004 17:14:47 +0700 (NOVST) (envelope-from danfe@regency.nsu.ru) Received: (from danfe@localhost) by regency.nsu.ru (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i3OAEljp013803; Sat, 24 Apr 2004 17:14:47 +0700 (NOVST) (envelope-from danfe) Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2004 17:14:46 +0700 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Alfred Perlstein Message-ID: <20040424101446.GA12719@regency.nsu.ru> References: <200404231627.i3NGRcVA096244@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040424085913.GA78817@elvis.mu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040424085913.GA78817@elvis.mu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org cc: Tim Kientzle cc: src-committers@freebsd.org cc: Julian Elischer cc: cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bad news for bsdtar.. X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2004 10:14:26 -0000 On Sat, Apr 24, 2004 at 01:59:13AM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * Julian Elischer [040423 12:21] wrote: > > done on a small subdirectory of our data... > > (only accounts starting with 849xxx) > > total data as reported by 'du': 9394486 KB (9GB) > > (note du takes links into account and doesn't count the same data twice) > > number of files with > 1 link: > > Have you guys thought of using aio or at least another process > to parallelize IO? (One to read files, and one to write out the > archive) > > Actually with our kernel threads in 5 you could just use those > to speed IO. IMHO, still non-blocking/async IO would be faster, and more probably portable, unless I'm utterly wrong, of course. 8-) ./danfe