From owner-freebsd-current Mon Apr 16 9:34:42 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from aslan.scsiguy.com (aslan.scsiguy.com [63.229.232.106]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1584F37B43C for ; Mon, 16 Apr 2001 09:34:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gibbs@scsiguy.com) Received: from scsiguy.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by aslan.scsiguy.com (8.11.2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f3GGYZs11356; Mon, 16 Apr 2001 10:34:35 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from gibbs@scsiguy.com) Message-Id: <200104161634.f3GGYZs11356@aslan.scsiguy.com> To: Matt Dillon Cc: Doug Barton , "'current@freebsd.org'" Subject: Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 15 Apr 2001 23:16:18 PDT." <200104160616.f3G6GI973782@earth.backplane.com> Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2001 10:34:35 -0600 From: "Justin T. Gibbs" Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I don't consider it inefficient. Sure, if you look at this one aspect > of the caching taken out of context it may appear to be inefficient, > but if you look at the whole enchilada the memory issue is nothing > more then a minor footnote - not worth the effort of worrying about. This is like saying that there is nothing to be gained by making better use of available cache memory. I don't care that the cache is dynamic and caches the right things when the cache is effectively made so small that it doesn't cache my working set. Even with VMIO turned on for directories, Linux kicks our ass in caching meta-data unless you have a lot of memory. That sucks. -- Justin To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message