From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Aug 7 15:10:16 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from hand.dotat.at (sfo-gw.covalent.net [207.44.198.62]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD30937B825; Mon, 7 Aug 2000 15:10:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fanf@dotat.at) Received: from fanf by hand.dotat.at with local (Exim 3.15 #3) id 13Lv5w-000DbQ-00; Mon, 07 Aug 2000 22:10:04 +0000 Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 22:10:04 +0000 From: Tony Finch To: Robert Watson Cc: Dennis , hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD belly up with big config Message-ID: <20000807221004.U24886@hand.dotat.at> References: <200008051708.NAA00486@etinc.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: Organization: Covalent Technologies, Inc Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Robert Watson wrote: > >I'd made some similar observations about the current lack of scalability >both in management of (struct ifnet) chains, and mountpoints in the file >system. When I had a brief look at the way mount points are handled I concluded that most of the time they were found via the vnode tree which is independent of the number of mounted filesystems. The list of mountpoints is only scanned rarely, when you are doing heavy stuff like mounting or unmounting a filesystem. Tony. -- en oeccget g mtcaa f.a.n.finch v spdlkishrhtewe y dot@dotat.at eatp o v eiti i d. fanf@covalent.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message