Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 09:49:06 +0100 From: Stijn Hoop <stijn@win.tue.nl> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: Doug Barton <DougB@freebsd.org>, Kirk McKusick <mckusick@freebsd.org>, cvs-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, Conrad Sabatier <conrads@cox.net>, current@freebsd.org, raymond.j.kohler@lmco.com, drosih@rpi.edu, ak03@gte.com Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/fs/specfs spec_vnops.c Message-ID: <20021104084906.GA84347@pcwin002.win.tue.nl> In-Reply-To: <90623.1036396081@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <3DC6245C.8D31A6A7@FreeBSD.org> <90623.1036396081@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--tThc/1wpZn/ma/RB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 08:48:01AM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <3DC6245C.8D31A6A7@FreeBSD.org>, Doug Barton writes: > >Kirk, > > > >I'm adding a bunch of people to the list who were involved in a thread > >on -current on this topic. I also tried this change and noticed that > >things did seem a tiny bit snappier (although my system is slow enough > >that it could have just been my imagination).=20 >=20 > All things considered, I think we should just pla to leave it this way > for 5.0-R. Until now people were used to wait for fsck to finish, at > least now they can do something in while it runs. Well... like I indicated earlier in the thread on -CURRENT, things were definitely *slow*. I also said I would try to provide benchmarks if people told me how to do that (and what to time). In any case, as a rough measurement, starting X on -CURRENT took about 2-3 seconds vs. about half a second on -STABLE on the exact same hardware. It was even measurable on a simple 'ls' in a large directory. I think if this is left in as is, people 'new' to FreeBSD will think it's dead slow, and move on elsewhere. > I belive GEOM provides the framework where we can properly tag I/O > requests with a priority, propagate that priority down to the device > drivers and act accordingly in the disksort disk-scheduling code. If that's the case, I'd like to see it in 5.0R. > That would allow us to address not only the bgfsck but also things > like silly-seek-syndrome and other sub-optimal issues in our current > I/O system. That would be great. --Stijn --=20 The right half of the brain controls the left half of the body. This means that only left handed people are in their right mind. --tThc/1wpZn/ma/RB Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE9xjSCY3r/tLQmfWcRAmXnAJ9ioCeA/kY3r5wpTF33aGhPHTfWswCdEHAB 5AI0VnZjCDjH++7K260Yu1w= =mE5i -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --tThc/1wpZn/ma/RB-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021104084906.GA84347>