* [Ocfs2-devel] odirect hack
@ 2010-10-01 22:09 Sunil Mushran
2010-10-07 22:38 ` Mark Fasheh
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Sunil Mushran @ 2010-10-01 22:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ocfs2-devel
Mark,
I was discussing with Joel whether it was time for us to special
case the odirect hack we've had since day 1. The one that allows
concurrent odirect writes.
I am wondering whether we should allow users control that behavior
via a mount option. parallel_directio, maybe.
Sunil
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* [Ocfs2-devel] odirect hack
2010-10-01 22:09 [Ocfs2-devel] odirect hack Sunil Mushran
@ 2010-10-07 22:38 ` Mark Fasheh
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Mark Fasheh @ 2010-10-07 22:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ocfs2-devel
On Fri, Oct 01, 2010 at 03:09:45PM -0700, Sunil Mushran wrote:
> I was discussing with Joel whether it was time for us to special
> case the odirect hack we've had since day 1. The one that allows
> concurrent odirect writes.
Right.
> I am wondering whether we should allow users control that behavior
> via a mount option. parallel_directio, maybe.
I think that's got a lot of usefulness, so yeah I'd definitely be behind
this. IMHO, we should take the opportunity to clearly define what it means
for the customer too:
"With this, parallel direct I/O from multiple nodes will be allowed. This
increases throughput on some workloads dramatically but at the expense of
inode mtime updates..." etc etc.
--Mark
--
Mark Fasheh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-10-07 22:38 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-10-01 22:09 [Ocfs2-devel] odirect hack Sunil Mushran
2010-10-07 22:38 ` Mark Fasheh
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.