Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 1 Feb 2002 14:47:51 -0500 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Radix-tree pagecache for 2.5 |
| |
On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 06:44:50PM +0000, arjan@fenrus.demon.nl wrote: > In article <20020201132953.A27508@havoc.gtf.org> you wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 09:06:37AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >> Even databases often use multiple files, and quite frankly, a database > >> that doesn't use mmap and doesn't try very hard to not cause extra system > >> calls is going to be bad performance-wise _regardless_ of any page cache > >> locking. > > > I've always thought that read(2) and write(2) would in the end wind up > > faster than mmap(2)... Tests in my rewritten cp/rm/mv type utilities > > seem to bear this out. > > the biggest reason for this is that we *suck* at readahead for mmap....
Is there not also fault overhead and similar issues related to mmap(2) in general, that are not present with read(2)/write(2)?
Jeff
- 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/
| |