lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Jul]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:57    [W:0.113 / U:0.040 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site