Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2011 13:39:53 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> To: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@acm.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: UPDATING 20110730 Message-ID: <4E392579.4070001@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20110802210907.GB78870@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> References: <20110801085135.GA45113@lpthe.jussieu.fr> <4E367999.8000906@FreeBSD.org> <20110802210907.GB78870@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 03/08/2011 00:09 Peter Jeremy said the following: > An alternative viewpoint is that this is wasteful because data is then > double-buffered. If you stop accessing data on disk after putting it into an application cache, then there would not be double-buffering, the OS is free to evict it from its cache. > An alternative view is that the default ZFS configuration is sub-optimal and > should be fixed I agree with this. > - rather than insisting that every tool that accesses more than a handful of > files should do its own caching. But not for this reason. > (And, reading zfs-discuss, avg@ is far from the only person to have been > bitten by the ZFS metadata limit). But for this reason :-) -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4E392579.4070001>