Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 10:20:20 +0200 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org> Cc: current@freebsd.org, Marian Hettwer <MH@kernel32.de> Subject: Re: MySQL Performance 6.0rc1 Message-ID: <21137.1130401220@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 27 Oct 2005 15:12:21 %2B0800." <43607DD5.3020708@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <43607DD5.3020708@freebsd.org>, David Xu writes: >Check gettimeofday syscall, it follows every I/O syscall, I think >our gettimeofday is tooooooo expensive, if we can directly get time from >memory, the performance will be improved further. Why would anybody take a timestamp at all I/O syscalls ? "I wonder why my car can only go 30 km/h with the trunk full of concrete" ? In a data base application I could possibly understand a timestamp after every write. But after _all_ I/O syscalls ? That's just plain stupid... -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?21137.1130401220>