From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steve French Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/09] cifs: local caching support using FS-Cache Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 13:09:40 -0500 Message-ID: References: <1278333663-30464-1-git-send-email-sjayaraman@suse.de> <4C3DF6BF.3070001@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Suresh Jayaraman , linux-cifs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-cachefs-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, David Howells To: Scott Lovenberg Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4C3DF6BF.3070001-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-cifs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Scott Lovenberg wrote: > On 7/5/2010 8:41 AM, Suresh Jayaraman wrote: >> >> This patchset is a second try at adding persistent, local caching fa= cility >> for >> CIFS using the FS-Cache interface. >> >> > > Just wondering, have you bench marked this at all? =A0I'd be interest= ed to see > how this compares (performance and scaling) to an oplock-centric desi= gn. > > I'd hazard a guess that with pipelining support in SMB2 the performan= ce will > be even better since you can have a hot cache and more requests in fl= ight. Yes - very plausibly --=20 Thanks, Steve