Re: [RFC] Generic deferred file writing

From: Daniel Phillips (phillips@innominate.de)
Date: Sun Dec 31 2000 - 14:10:42 EST


Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I do not believe that "get_block()" is as big of a problem as people make
> it out to be.

I didn't mention get_block - disk accesses obviously far outweigh
filesystem cpu/cache usage in overall impact. The question is, what
happens to disk access patterns when we do the deferred allocation.

> One form of deferred writes I _do_ like is the mount-time-option form.
> Because that one doesn't add complexity. Kind of like the "noatime" mount
> option - it can be worth it under some circumstances, and sometimes it's
> acceptable to not get 100% unix semantics - at which point deferred writes
> have none of the disadvantages of trying to be clever.

And the added attraction of requiring almost no effort.
        

--
Daniel
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 31 2000 - 21:00:16 EST