Messages in this thread |  | | From | Neil Brown <> | Date | Sun, 12 Nov 2000 07:16:29 +1100 (EST) | Subject | Re: [patch] nfsd optimizations for test10 |
| |
On Friday November 10, ying@almaden.ibm.com wrote: > Hi, > > I made some optimizations on racache in nfsd in test10. The idea is to > replace with existing fixed length table for readahead cache in NFSD with a > hash table. > The old racache is essentially ineffective in dealing with large # of > files, and yet eats CPU cycles in scanning the table (even though the table > is small), > the hash table-based is much more effective and fast. I have generated the > patch for test10 and tested it. > > (See attached file: nfshdiff)(See attached file: nfsdiff) > > > Ying
Thanks for this. A couple of questions and comments:
1/ Do you have any stats showing what sort of speedup this gives - I'm curious.
2/ Was there a particular reason that you didn't use the include/linux/list.h list structures for the hash and lru chains? If not, I suggest that doing so would be a good idea. It should make the code clearer and more in-keeping with other code in the kernel.
3/ It is easiest for (many of) us if you just include the patch in-line in your email messages rather than as an attachment. You can then be sure that EVERY mail reader can display it effectively, and Linus has said a number of times that he doesn't like attachments. 3a/ If you or your mailer insists on using attachments, please make sure that the mime-type of the attachment is correct - text/plain, not applications/x-unknown. Again, that makes it a lot easier to read your patch.
4/ I doubt that this is significant enough to go in before 2.4.0-final now, but it probably has a reasonable chance of getting in shortly afterwards.
NeilBrown knfsd maintainer. - 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/
|  |