From: "Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
Cc: Duncan Sands <duncan.sands@math.u-psud.fr>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net"
<ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Ext2-devel] Re: fsync 50 times slower after 2.5.27
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 22:44:36 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020919224436.E2831@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3D8A4016.F364B303@digeo.com>; from akpm@digeo.com on Thu, Sep 19, 2002 at 02:22:30PM -0700
Hi,
On Thu, Sep 19, 2002 at 02:22:30PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Thanks for testing. The semantics of sched_yield() have changed
> significantly in 2.5. Probably correctly, but it is breaking a
> few things which were tuned for the old semantics. Amongst those
> things are OpenOffice and, it seems, ext3 transaction batching.
>
> The transaction batching does good things under some situations,
> and we want it to keep working. I'll sit tight for the while, see
> where shed_yield() behaviour ends up. If we still have a problem
> then probably a schedule_timeout(1) in there would suffice.
Actually, with a proper yield() implementation, we can achieve the
same effect by making the commit thread do the yield itself before
locking down the transaction. Having _every_ sync thread do a yield
itself before calling for a commit is probably overkill.
--Stephen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-09-19 21:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-09-19 0:22 fsync 50 times slower after 2.5.27 Duncan Sands
2002-09-19 0:35 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-19 1:00 ` 2.4.20-pre7-ac2 compile and IrDA Alexander Hoogerhuis
2002-09-19 1:25 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-19 1:33 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-19 10:45 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-19 12:27 ` Alexander Hoogerhuis
2002-09-19 4:43 ` Willy Tarreau
2002-09-19 6:34 ` Alexander Hoogerhuis
[not found] ` <200209192032.25933.duncan.sands@math.u-psud.fr>
2002-09-19 21:22 ` fsync 50 times slower after 2.5.27 Andrew Morton
2002-09-19 21:44 ` Stephen C. Tweedie [this message]
2002-09-20 12:15 ` Duncan Sands
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20020919224436.E2831@redhat.com \
--to=sct@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@digeo.com \
--cc=duncan.sands@math.u-psud.fr \
--cc=ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.