![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 01:09:37AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 12:19:21AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de> wrote: > > > > > > > > BTW, one thing that should definitely do readhaead and it's > > > > not doing that (at least in 2.4) is the readdir path, again to generate > > > > big commands, no matter the seeks. It was lost with the directory in > > > > pagecache. > > > > > > Yes. But ext3 is still doing directory readahead, and I have never > > > noticed it gaining any particular benefit over ext2 from it. > > > > At least for big directories it should be at least a quite obvious > > microoptimization, if you do it at the logical level. Maybe it wasn't > > worthwhile in the past (like in ext3) because it was done at the block > > layer with a dumb reada rather than with proper read of the next logical > > block before wait_on_buffer. Also keep in mind the max readahead > > generated by the block layer is nothing compared to the true readahead > > that the logical layer is able to generate. > > > > No, it's doing the directory readahead against the correct blocks (it calls > ext3_getblk() to find them). yes, sorry. Andrea - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:33 [W:0.597 / U:0.110 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||||