Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 12 Jul 2001 17:51:17 -0400 | From | Chris Mason <> | Subject | Re: 2x Oracle slowdown from 2.2.16 to 2.4.4 |
| |
On Friday, July 13, 2001 01:31:42 AM +0400 Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com> wrote:
> Lance, I would appreciate it if you would be more careful to identify that you are using O_SYNC, > which is a special case we are not optimized for, and which I am frankly skeptical should be used at > all by an application instead of using fsync judiciously. It is rare that an application is > inherently completely incapable of ever having two I/Os not be serialized, and using O_SYNC to force > every IO to be serialized rather than picking and choosing when to use fsync, well, I have my doubts > frankly. If a user really needs every operation to be synchronous, they should buy a system with an > SSD for the journal from applianceware.com (they sell them tuned to run ReiserFS), or else they are > just going to go real slow, no matter what the FS does. >
There is no reason for reiserfs to be 5 times slower than ext2 at anything ;-) Regardless of if O_SYNC is a good idea or not. I should have optimized the original code for this case, as oracle is reason enough to do it.
-chris
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |