Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 10:22:12 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net> Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Freeing vnodes. Message-ID: <20050316102212.hyq4ptdcoc4k0s48@netchild.homeip.net> In-Reply-To: <20050315195525.F20708@mail.chesapeake.net> References: <20050314213038.V20708@mail.chesapeake.net> <20050315035032.T20708@mail.chesapeake.net> <200503151911.j2FJBWpd055485@apollo.backplane.com> <20050315195525.F20708@mail.chesapeake.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net> wrote:
> I haven't seen my machine even get to 10,000 free vnodes with this patch
> running. Even while doing a 'find . -exec stat {} \; >> /dev/null'. With
> the new mechanism all of these vnodes would go away after a second. It
> might be nice to keep them around for longer if resources permit, but I do
> think a timeout based approach is the correct one. Please note that with
> the old code you wouldn't even keep them around for a second if we were
> above minvnodes. They would be recycled on the next call to
> getnewvnode().
Does this mean the behavior of
find /usr/src -name .\#\* -o -name \*.orig -print
followed by
find /usr/src -name .\#\* -o -name \*.orig -print -delete
after looking at the output on an idle system does change (assuming the
system is below minvnodes)?
Actually the first command needs a little bit of time with a slow disk, the
second one is very fast compared to the first one.
Bye,
Alexander.
--
http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137
There's no room in the drug world for amateurs.
-- Raoul Duke
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050316102212.hyq4ptdcoc4k0s48>