![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 11:36:17PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > - hash = full_name_hash(name, len); > > err, you might want to calculate that hash outside the spinlock. Hmm, good catch. > Maybe have a lock per bucket, too. That could be an avenue to explore. I guess we probably want to optimize the actual lookup and memory usage before looking at that. > A 1MB hashtable is verging on comical. How may data are there in total? Yes 1MB is much too big. We're looking right now at 3 lock resources per inode, so total number of elements depends upon your file system I suppose. Hopefully I'll have some time today to run some basic tests which may show us what size strikes a better balance of performance versus memory overhead. --Mark -- Mark Fasheh Senior Software Developer, Oracle mark.fasheh@oracle.com - 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: 2006-03-06 12:10 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||