From owner-freebsd-arch Fri Jul 7 6:32: 9 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from ywing.creative.net.au (ywing.creative.net.au [203.56.168.34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CB3337B505 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2000 06:32:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from adrian@ywing.creative.net.au) Received: (from adrian@localhost) by ywing.creative.net.au (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA86986; Fri, 7 Jul 2000 15:38:44 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from adrian) Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 15:38:43 +0200 From: Adrian Chadd To: Marius Bendiksen Cc: Matthew Dillon , Alfred Perlstein , freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Alterations to vops Message-ID: <20000707153843.H82859@ywing.creative.net.au> References: <200007070143.SAA96248@apollo.backplane.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: ; from mbendiks@eunet.no on Fri, Jul 07, 2000 at 03:05:48PM +0200 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Jul 07, 2000, Marius Bendiksen wrote: > > What may be happening here is stalling in namei(). find and cvsup > > are very heavy on path lookups and that combined with seek latency > > on the drive could result in filesystem locks on directories being > > held for much longer periods of time then normal. Any other process > > trying to 'open' a file (verses reading or writing an already-open file) > > would start to stall. > > Wouldn't this problem be alleviated by making the operations incremental, > rather than performing the whole thing in one go in kernelspace? Right, uhm, I'm still not entirely sure of what you mean by "incremental". Do you want to give a nice long example of how its done now and how you are proposing it should be done? Adrian -- Adrian Chadd Build a man a fire, and he's warm for the rest of the evening. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message