Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 22:52:59 +0100 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> Cc: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: patches for test / review Message-ID: <21213.953589179@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 20 Mar 2000 11:59:02 PST." <20000320115902.C14789@fw.wintelcom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20000320115902.C14789@fw.wintelcom.net>, Alfred Perlstein writes: >* Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> [000320 11:45] wrote: >> In message <20000320111544.A14789@fw.wintelcom.net>, Alfred Perlstein writes: >> >> >Keeping the currect cluster code is a bad idea, if the drivers were >> >taught how to traverse the linked list in the buf struct rather >> >than just notice "a big buffer" we could avoid a lot of page >> >twiddling and also allow for massive IO clustering ( > 64k ) >> >> Before we redesign the clustering, I would like to know if we >> actually have any recent benchmarks which prove that clustering >> is overall beneficial ? > >Yes it is really benificial. > >I'm not talking about a redesign of the clustering code as much as >making the drivers that take a callback from it actually traverse >the 'union cluster_info' rather than relying on the system to fake >the pages being contiguous via remapping. > >There's nothing wrong with the clustering algorithms, it's just the >steps it has to take to work with the drivers. Hmm, try to keep vinum/RAID5 in the picture when you look at this code, it complicated matters a lot. -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?21213.953589179>