Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 06:04:36 -0400 From: jhell <jhell@DataIX.net> To: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: zfs very poor performance compared to ufs due to lack of cache? Message-ID: <4C91EBB4.9080304@DataIX.net> In-Reply-To: <4C91BACD.3080501@freebsd.org> References: <20100908084855.GF2465@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <4C874F00.3050605@freebsd.org> <A6D7E134B24F42E395C30A375A6B50AF@multiplay.co.uk> <4C8D087B.5040404@freebsd.org> <03537796FAB54E02959E2D64FC83004F@multiplay.co.uk> <4C8D280F.3040803@freebsd.org> <3FBF66BF11AA4CBBA6124CA435A4A31B@multiplay.co.uk> <4C8E4212.30000@freebsd.org> <B98EBECBD399417CA5390C20627384B1@multiplay.co.uk> <D79F15FEB5794315BD8668E40B414BF0@multiplay.co.uk> <20100915104635.GA59871@icarus.home.lan> <8E233260F0334BC58B2C07F383939F8E@multiplay.co.uk> <4C9131F6.10807@DataIX.net> <B35942AA5DC3444DAFFBE939016F5D33@multiplay.co.uk> <4C91409F.9090204@DataIX.net> <4C91BACD.3080501@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 09/16/2010 02:35, Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 16/09/2010 00:54 jhell said the following: >> On 09/15/2010 17:30, Steven Hartland wrote: >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "jhell" jhell@DataIX.net >>> >>>> On 09/15/2010 06:54, Steven Hartland wrote: >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy Chadwick" >>>>> <freebsd@jdc.parodius.com> >>>>>> Looks like Andriy just committed something to HEAD/CURRENT which might >>>>>> address this: >>>>>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/141305 >>>>> >>>>> Already running that as part of the patches unfortunately, it doesn't >>>>> seem >>>>> to have any effect. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Is it ? vm_page_set_validclean(m, off, bytes); >>>> I recall you saying that you added this from earlier in the thread. >>>> could be wrong though but what Andriy committed was the following. >>>> >>>> or ? vm_page_set_valid(m, off, bytes); >>> >>> >>> Ahh good catch I have: >>> if (error == 0) >>> vm_page_set_validclean(m, off, bytes); >>> >>> and not as mentioned by 141305: >>> if (error == 0) >>> vm_page_set_valid(m, off, bytes); >>> >>> Which should it actaully be? >>> >> >> Looking at the manual page vm_page_bits(9) I don't see a >> vm_page_is_validclean so really would it have a effect ?. >> >> > > Maybe the man page doesn't have it, but the function is real :-) > In this case it actually doesn't matter much which one to use, but what was > committed is more correct (as you might have expected). > Yeah that's what I thought since the data is clean in the first place that extra ability to zero off the end bits shouldn't ever need to happen. Notice though I mixed up vm_page_set* with vm_page_is*, I must have been sleeping during that point ;). -- jhell,v
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C91EBB4.9080304>