From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Tue, 22 Jul 2008 19:22:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from larry.melbourne.sgi.com (larry.melbourne.sgi.com [134.14.52.130]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with SMTP id m6N2MYJv004498 for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 19:22:35 -0700 Message-ID: <48869628.8010201@sgi.com> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:23:36 +1000 From: Mark Goodwin Reply-To: markgw@sgi.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] XFS: replace the mount inode list with radix tree traversals V2 References: <1216773673-3620-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> In-Reply-To: <1216773673-3620-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Dave Chinner Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com Dave Chinner wrote: > The list of all inodes on a mount is superfluous. We can traverse > all inodes now by walking the per-AG inode radix trees without > needing a separate list. This enables us to remove a bunch of > complex list traversal code and remove another two pointers from > the xfs_inode. sounds like a good move. > Also, by replacing the sync traversal with an ascending inode > number traversal, we will issue better inode I/O patterns for > writeback triggered by xfssyncd or unmount. Dave, have you made any performance measurements showing this to be the case? If so, what is the improvement? Or should we just assume such traversals will be more naturally sequential and therefore more efficient? Cheers -- Mark