Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2004 17:14:46 +0700 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@nsu.ru> To: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> Cc: cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bad news for bsdtar.. Message-ID: <20040424101446.GA12719@regency.nsu.ru> In-Reply-To: <20040424085913.GA78817@elvis.mu.org> References: <200404231627.i3NGRcVA096244@repoman.freebsd.org> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0404231145150.6894-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> <20040424085913.GA78817@elvis.mu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Apr 24, 2004 at 01:59:13AM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> [040423 12:21] wrote: > > done on a small subdirectory of our data... > > (only accounts starting with 849xxx) > > total data as reported by 'du': 9394486 KB (9GB) > > (note du takes links into account and doesn't count the same data twice) > > number of files with > 1 link: > > Have you guys thought of using aio or at least another process > to parallelize IO? (One to read files, and one to write out the > archive) > > Actually with our kernel threads in 5 you could just use those > to speed IO. IMHO, still non-blocking/async IO would be faster, and more probably portable, unless I'm utterly wrong, of course. 8-) ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040424101446.GA12719>