Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 23:15:10 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: Marius Bendiksen <mbendiks@eunet.no> Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Alterations to vops Message-ID: <20000628231510.F275@fw.wintelcom.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.10006290706280.21288-100000@login-1.eunet.no>; from mbendiks@eunet.no on Thu, Jun 29, 2000 at 07:18:37AM %2B0200 References: <Pine.BSF.4.05.10006290706280.21288-100000@login-1.eunet.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Marius Bendiksen <mbendiks@eunet.no> [000628 22:22] wrote: > After having discussed the issue of find(1) and similar processes > hogging CPU due to being very un-nice when stuck in these waiting > on BIO, I have, together with Brian Feldman, who first pointed it > out as a problem, come up with a suggested solution. > First off comes adding "off_t *offs" to the relevant vops. > This value would be initialized to VNOVAL by the caller, and then > be updated by the vops in subsequent calls. > Secondly, a new error value, ERETRY, would be added, which > would signify that the vop has not completed and should rather be > reissued. The libraries would do this transparently to the users. > This value is proposed rather than EAGAIN as there is no resource > shortage at all. > > This mechanism would also simplify the directory scanning in UFS, > at least somewhat. Can you elaborate on the problem you are describing? I'm not sure I understand besideds certain processes being able to hog the buffercache and filesystems. -Alfred To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000628231510.F275>