Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 19:33:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> Cc: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: reducing the number of NFSv3 commit ops Message-ID: <200004050233.TAA72623@apollo.backplane.com> References: <14570.10864.359054.10598@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <20000404141641.P20770@fw.wintelcom.net> <14570.22237.61025.935384@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <20000404143243.S20770@fw.wintelcom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:>
:> I'll look at that tonight. But before I do -- why is it broken?
:> (the name sorta implies that it us ;)
:
:I'm not sure, i did it a while back and ran out of time to get it
:working, it functions in the strategy layer and tries to grab adjacent
:commit blocks to the already clustered IO.
:
:I think I may have some math errors or something, I haven't had time
:to give it a retry in a while.
:
:--
:-Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]
:"I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."
If I remember the right patch, I think my comment on it was
that the buffers should use non-blocking locks rather then
blocking locks in order to avoid deadlocks, which it looks like
you did.
This may still patch into -stable but it probably isn't safe
to patch into -current. It still looks a little rough but
the general concept is sound.
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<dillon@backplane.com>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200004050233.TAA72623>