Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 09:16:40 +0100 From: Emanuel Strobl <Emanuel.Strobl@gmx.net> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: TEST: phk_bufwork patchfile Message-ID: <200411160916.47131.Emanuel.Strobl@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <20041115222618.GB579@unixpages.org> References: <38677.1100390114@critter.freebsd.dk> <20041115222618.GB579@unixpages.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--nextPart7162852.ZKrXdzz5IJ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Am Montag, 15. November 2004 23:26 schrieb Christian Brueffer: > On Sun, Nov 14, 2004 at 12:55:14AM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > I have uploaded a snapshot patch of my p4 phk_bufwork branch relative > > to -current as of right now: > > > > http://phk.freebsd.dk/patch/phk_bufwork20041113.patch [...] > > > > Any and all benchmarking will be very welcome! > > I've been running this on my desktop for two days now with no ill > effects. At the moment I don't have time for benchmarking though. I'd love to do some benchmarks, but unfortunately I don't have a spare mach= ine=20 for 6-curr, but a 5.3-stable wich will go in production next week. Is it=20 possible to apply the framework to -stable? My intents are to make storage available for jails via regular files which = is=20 at the moment no option since performance gets horrible. If I understand=20 things right then this framework should improove performance dramatically=20 when e. g. copying /sys to /vnode_backed_md0. Thanks, =2DHarry > > - Christian --nextPart7162852.ZKrXdzz5IJ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBBmbdvBylq0S4AzzwRAnKtAKCI1ay+XWWPTyaHSxImvpdSVLQxSACdGq0A nEoO2wpXdUcvOKZ059sgSIw= =qSyj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart7162852.ZKrXdzz5IJ--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200411160916.47131.Emanuel.Strobl>