From: Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>
To: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
Cc: Marr <marr@flex.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, reiserfs-dev@namesys.com,
philb@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Drastic Slowdown of 'fseek()' Calls From 2.4 to 2.6 -- VMM Change?
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 10:38:34 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <440498AA.6000101@namesys.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4403935A.3080503@tmr.com>
Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Hans Reiser wrote:
>
>> Andrew Morton wrote:
>>
>>> runs like a dog on 2.6's reiserfs. libc is doing a (probably) 128k
>>> read
>>> on every fseek.
>>>
>>> - There may be a libc stdio function which allows you to tune this
>>> behaviour.
>>>
>>> - libc should probably be a bit more defensive about this anyway -
>>> plainly the filesystem is being silly.
>>>
>>>
>> I really thank you for isolating the problem, but I don't see how you
>> can do other than blame glibc for this. The recommended IO size is only
>> relevant to uncached data, and glibc is using it regardless of whether
>> or not it is cached or uncached. Do I misunderstand something
>> myself here?
>
>
> I think the issue is not "blame" but what effect this behavior would
> have on things like database loads, where seek-write would be common.
> Good to get this info to users and admins.
>
Well, ok, let me phrase it as "this should be fixed in glibc". Does
anyone know who the maintainer for it is?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-02-28 18:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-02-24 20:22 Drastic Slowdown of 'fseek()' Calls From 2.4 to 2.6 -- VMM Change? Marr
2006-02-25 5:16 ` Andrew Morton
2006-02-26 13:07 ` Ingo Oeser
2006-02-26 13:50 ` Nick Piggin
2006-02-26 14:11 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-02-27 20:52 ` Hans Reiser
2006-02-28 0:34 ` Nick Piggin
2006-02-28 18:42 ` Hans Reiser
2006-02-28 18:51 ` Hans Reiser
2006-02-27 20:24 ` Marr
2006-02-27 21:53 ` Hans Reiser
2006-02-28 0:03 ` Bill Davidsen
2006-02-28 18:38 ` Hans Reiser [this message]
2006-03-05 23:02 ` Readahead value 128K? (was Re: Drastic Slowdown of 'fseek()' Calls From 2.4 to 2.6 -- VMM Change?) Linda Walsh
2006-03-07 19:53 ` Marr
2006-03-07 21:15 ` Linda Walsh
2006-03-12 21:53 ` Marr
2006-03-12 22:15 ` Mark Lord
2006-03-13 4:36 ` Marr
2006-03-13 14:41 ` Mark Lord
2006-03-13 18:15 ` Hans Reiser
2006-03-13 20:00 ` Marr
[not found] <5JRJO-6Al-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
2006-02-24 23:31 ` Drastic Slowdown of 'fseek()' Calls From 2.4 to 2.6 -- VMM Change? Robert Hancock
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=440498AA.6000101@namesys.com \
--to=reiser@namesys.com \
--cc=davidsen@tmr.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marr@flex.com \
--cc=philb@gnu.org \
--cc=reiserfs-dev@namesys.com \
/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.