Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 9 Nov 2011 09:26:19 -0500
From:      John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To:        freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Cc:        Bruce Cran <bruce@cran.org.uk>, Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com>, Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl>, Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl>, Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org>, arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: [PATCH] fadvise(2) system call
Message-ID:  <201111090926.19447.jhb@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <3D0BF37D-0C31-4509-A231-F4D1F81472D8@kientzle.com>
References:  <201110281426.00013.jhb@freebsd.org> <20111109043512.GT6110@elvis.mu.org> <3D0BF37D-0C31-4509-A231-F4D1F81472D8@kientzle.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, November 09, 2011 1:18:07 am Tim Kientzle wrote:
> It's not at all obvious.
> 
> If I have 1GB of cache and I'm going
> to generate and then read back a 2GB file,
> the best strategy is to hold the first
> 1GB in cache.
> 
> If I'm going to write the file and it will never be
> read back, then the best strategy is to not
> cache any of it.
> 
> Sometimes, a program knows which of
> these is likely, but if it doesn't know, it shouldn't
> say.

Exactly.

-- 
John Baldwin



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201111090926.19447.jhb>