From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id n83FoptX112119 for ; Thu, 3 Sep 2009 10:51:06 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 47DAF15C0EE2 for ; Thu, 3 Sep 2009 08:51:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [18.85.46.34]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 2eRd6SaI86FzSQP2 for ; Thu, 03 Sep 2009 08:51:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 11:48:39 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: Mounted xfs slows down block device Message-ID: <20090903154839.GC16715@infradead.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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: Jan Engelhardt Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com Strange, as XFS doesn't actually use the block device mapping at all, so all the caching doesn't interact with each other. Maybe some throtteling code in the VM doesn't like these parallel accesses. But I need to add that reading the block device on a mounted filesystem is not a good idea anyay - you will not get any sort of concistency guarantee. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs