Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 14:40:26 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: Andrew Mobbs <andrewm@chiark.greenend.org.uk>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Re2: msync performance Message-ID: <200202222240.g1MMeQP31567@apollo.backplane.com> References: <15478.31998.459219.178549@chiark.greenend.org.uk> <200202222042.g1MKg4u22700@apollo.backplane.com> <3C76C1C7.248128A4@mindspring.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
:You will need to put it on two lists, I think.
:
:Though it is not sorted in adjacency order, it is sorted
:into LRU order, I think, and simply resorting by adjacency
:would destroy the LRU property.
Nope, object->memq is not sorted in any order whatsover.
:Alternately, does msync() use count as "use" for the
:purposes of LRU? If so, I'm all wet, and sorting it will
:work, if it's only done at msync() time (e.g. you won't
:be able to use an insertion sort).
:
:-- Terry
What 'count' are you refering to?
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<dillon@backplane.com>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
home |
help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200202222240.g1MMeQP31567>