From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id mBEIaAgF011689 for ; Sun, 14 Dec 2008 12:36:10 -0600 Received: from mail.lichtvoll.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 717591DF9F for ; Sun, 14 Dec 2008 10:36:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.lichtvoll.de (mondschein.lichtvoll.de [194.150.191.11]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id uZX9nvVcxpgNNBSN for ; Sun, 14 Dec 2008 10:36:09 -0800 (PST) From: Martin Steigerwald Subject: Re: 12x performance drop on md/linux+sw raid1 due to barriers [xfs] Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 19:35:36 +0100 References: <1229225480.16555.152.camel@localhost> <18757.4606.966139.10342@tree.ty.sabi.co.uk> (sfid-20081214_183524_928808_CA8411E0) In-Reply-To: <18757.4606.966139.10342@tree.ty.sabi.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200812141935.36744.Martin@lichtvoll.de> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com Cc: Linux RAID Am Sonntag 14 Dezember 2008 schrieb Peter Grandi: > First of all, why are you people sending TWO copies to the XFS > mailing list? (to both linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com and xfs@oss.sgi.com). [...] > > So its really more of an expectation that wc+barriers on, > > performs better than wc+barriers off :) > > This is of course a misstatement: perhaps you intended to write > that ''wc on+barriers on'' would perform better than ''wc off + > barriers off'. I think Redeeman said exactly that ;-). Either both on or both off. -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs