From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p2HEKUqW244373 for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2011 09:20:41 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id E12A310EE14E for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2011 07:23:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [18.85.46.34]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 3V7jPhOIbsEm655m for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2011 07:23:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 10:23:13 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: preallocation transactions do not need to be synchronous Message-ID: <20110317142313.GA32673@infradead.org> References: <1299713852-7663-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20110310073634.GA25374@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110310073634.GA25374@infradead.org> 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: Dave Chinner Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 02:36:34AM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > I had the same patch in my queue, but it turns out even that isn't > enough for good performance when used fallocate in the fast path (e.g. > recent Samba). I'll send a more comprehensive optimization that > includes this soon. > > I also refactored the whole area to make the various flags more > sensible. Given that 2.6.38 is out now and I won't have my series ready in time I'm fine with putting your minimal version in for now, I'll port mine on top. Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs