Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 31 Dec 2000 20:10:42 +0100 | From | Daniel Phillips <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] Generic deferred file writing |
| |
Linus Torvalds wrote: > I do not believe that "get_block()" is as big of a problem as people make > it out to be.
I didn't mention get_block - disk accesses obviously far outweigh filesystem cpu/cache usage in overall impact. The question is, what happens to disk access patterns when we do the deferred allocation.
> One form of deferred writes I _do_ like is the mount-time-option form. > Because that one doesn't add complexity. Kind of like the "noatime" mount > option - it can be worth it under some circumstances, and sometimes it's > acceptable to not get 100% unix semantics - at which point deferred writes > have none of the disadvantages of trying to be clever.
And the added attraction of requiring almost no effort.
-- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |