Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 19:03:42 +0200 From: Fabian Keil <freebsd-listen@fabiankeil.de> To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NFSv3, ZFS, 10GE performance Message-ID: <20120326190342.0b78cbc8@fabiankeil.de> In-Reply-To: <alpine.GSO.2.01.1203261146200.22350@freddy.simplesystems.org> References: <4F703815.8070809@crashme.org> <jkpgt4$v55$1@dough.gmane.org> <4F709A18.50907@crashme.org> <alpine.GSO.2.01.1203261146200.22350@freddy.simplesystems.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] Bob Friesenhahn <bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us> wrote: > On Mon, 26 Mar 2012, Sven Brandenburg wrote: > > > > Hopefully, readahead doesn't kill performance for smaller files.. :-) > > You are right to be concerned. There are plenty of cases where > read-ahead damages application performance. Reading data which is > never actually used is expensive. > > It would be useful if FreeBSD would support posix_fadvise() so that > applications can specify the type of access they will use, and if this > advice can be used by NFS and the filesystem layer to decide if > read-ahead should be used, and how much. posix_fadvise() is already available in FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT. Fabian [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAk9woXEACgkQBYqIVf93VJ21HQCfbY2lvS2Nk31YdWC2S00WZH9x 9kwAoLd0l6a70JXXD774XJqnXSha++1o =dtoo -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120326190342.0b78cbc8>