lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [May]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: Ext3 vs NTFS performance
    From
    Date
    Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu> writes:

    > On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 02:21:40PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
    > > Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> writes:
    > > >
    > > > Conceivably we could address this in the filesystem without mucking other
    > > > things up. But I'd have thought the simplest damage-control would be to
    > > > detect this pattern in samba and to then use glibc's fallocate().
    > >
    > > The advantage of detecting it in kernel would be that it would handle
    > > Linux applications that do this (I suspect there are some) too.
    >
    > Um, which applications do you suspect? So we can hunt down those user
    > space applications programmers and slap them silly? Or rather,
    > unsilly, since that there's no good reason to ever suspect that
    > writing a byte every 128k would result in a good allocation layout on disk?

    Anything that uses glibc fallocate() ?

    -Andi
    -
    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: 2007-05-02 19:45    [W:0.021 / U:61.484 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site