From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Jun 20 22:52:18 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id A0A7F16A4CE; Sun, 20 Jun 2004 22:52:18 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from aldan.algebra.com (aldan.algebra.com [216.254.65.224])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 36B0A43D39; Sun, 20 Jun 2004 22:52:18 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from mi@aldan.algebra.com)
Received: from aldan.algebra.com (mi@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by aldan.algebra.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i5KMqB8m029175
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Sun, 20 Jun 2004 18:52:11 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from mi@aldan.algebra.com)
Received: by aldan.algebra.com (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i5KMqArv029174;
	Sun, 20 Jun 2004 18:52:10 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from mi)
From: Mikhail Teterin <mi+kde@aldan.algebra.com>
To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 18:52:08 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2
References: <200406200343.03920@aldan>
	<200406201835.i5KIZBeJ026532@apollo.backplane.com>
In-Reply-To: <200406201835.i5KIZBeJ026532@apollo.backplane.com>
X-Face: %UW#n0|w>ydeGt/b@1-.UFP=K^~-:0f#O:D7w<gv/&E-lL7twZCT8B~/PA4|\t$ti+22K">hJ5G_<5143Bb3kOIs9XpX+"V+~$adGP:J|SLieM31VIhqXeLBli"<kcG^EOVihy+z3/UR{6SCQ
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="koi8-u"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <200406201852.08030@aldan>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 11:53:21 +0000
cc: questions@freebsd.org
cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: read vs. mmap (or io vs. page faults)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 22:52:18 -0000

On Sunday 20 June 2004 02:35 pm, you wrote:
=
= :I this how things are supposed to be, or will mmap() become more
= :efficient eventually? Thanks!
= :
= :	-mi

=     It's hard to say.  mmap() could certainly be made more efficient, e.g.
=     by faulting in more pages at a time to reduce the actual fault rate.
=     But it's fairly difficult to beat a read copy into a small buffer.

Well, that's the thing -- by mmap-ing the whole file at once (and by
madvise-ing with MADV_SEQUENTIONAL), I thought, I told, the kernel
everything it needed to know to make the best decision. Why can't
page-faulting code do a better job using all this knowledge, than the
poor read, which only knows about the partial read in question?

I find it so disappointing, that it can, probably, be considered a bug.
I'll try this code on Linux and Solaris. If mmap is better there (as it
really ought to be), we have a problem, IMHO. Thanks!

	-mi