From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Nov 16 23:07:17 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 7459816A4CE
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Tue, 16 Nov 2004 23:07:17 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C363843D2F
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Tue, 16 Nov 2004 23:07:16 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id iAGN7C3C013093;
	Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:07:14 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
To: Dmitry Frolov <frolov@riss-telecom.ru>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 16 Nov 2004 23:45:36 +0600."
             <20041116174536.GA17279@nerve.riss-telecom.ru> 
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:07:12 +0100
Message-ID: <13092.1100646432@critter.freebsd.dk>
Sender: phk@critter.freebsd.dk
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: TEST: phk_bufwork patchfile 
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: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 23:07:17 -0000

In message <20041116174536.GA17279@nerve.riss-telecom.ru>, Dmitry Frolov writes
:
>* Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> [16.11.2004 14:19]:
>
>> >My intents are to make storage available for jails via regular files which 
>> >is at the moment no option since performance gets horrible. If I understand 
>> >things right then this framework should improove performance dramatically 
>> >when e. g. copying /sys to /vnode_backed_md0.
>> 
>> Not particularly.
>
>Performance issue with a file backed filesystems is a major showstopper
>for me too. Since I'm not a kernel hacker, I'm currenly waiting for
>someone to fix this. If I understand issue correctly, fixing it requires
>much work on syncer (probably some sort of "layering"?). Does anybody
>working or planning to work on this?

We're getting there, but things take time.

-- 
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.