lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jun]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: RFC: Exporting NOCMTIME to userspace
    Date
    Aleksandr Koltsoff <aleksandr.koltsoff@ebts.fi> writes:
    >
    > On the other hand, if someone can suggest a way to avoid timestamp
    > updates/causing inode writes, I'm all ears and eyes. (using the
    > block-layer directly or writing a custom fs is not really an elegant
    > solution, IMO).

    I recently looked at this for some other reason. One of the reasons
    c/m time became a problem recently are sub second time stamps
    in newer file systems, which can be a performance problem
    on some extreme loads (updating the time stamp requires taking
    locks and takes CPU time)

    I think what would be better would be to have flush intervals
    that specify that m/c time are only flushed with longer
    intervals (similar to the deferred atime that's now in there)

    This would still cause the inode to be written if it gets flushed from
    memory on low memory and occasionally depending on the interval, but
    most of the writes would be gone. All still with the same semantics.

    I think doing it this way would be preferable over just
    disabling it.

    -Andi

    --
    ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-06-21 10:59    [W:0.021 / U:1.052 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site