From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Mar 22 23:35:56 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from muzak.iinet.net.au (muzak.iinet.net.au [203.59.24.237]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7822237B574; Wed, 22 Mar 2000 23:35:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from jules.elischer.org (reggae-09-79.nv.iinet.net.au [203.59.67.79]) by muzak.iinet.net.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id PAA30777; Thu, 23 Mar 2000 15:35:26 +0800 Message-ID: <38D9B306.2781E494@elischer.org> Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 23:34:11 -0800 From: Julian Elischer X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (X11; I; FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT i386) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mike Smith Cc: Matthew Dillon , Paul Richards , Richard Wendland , Alfred Perlstein , Poul-Henning Kamp , current@freebsd.org, fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD random I/O performance issues References: <200003222039.MAA00661@mass.cdrom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org This is one of the things that made us do so badly in the benchmarks against NT/Linux last year. OBVIOUSLY one should be able to re-read this infoirmation without affecting a pending write. Mike Smith wrote: > > > effects of the I/O being in-progress. If a user program doesn't access > > any of the information it recently wrote the whole mechanism winds up > > operating asynchronously in the background. If a user program does, > > then the write behind mechanism breaks down and you get a stall. > > What makes no sense is that it should be perfectly ok to _read_ this > information back. > -- __--_|\ Julian Elischer / \ julian@elischer.org ( OZ ) World tour 2000 ---> X_.---._/ presently in: Perth v To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message