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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans