public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Jose R. Santos" <jrsantos@austin.ibm.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, anton@samba.org, dheger@us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dentry and inode cache hash algorithm performance changes.
Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 08:12:23 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040504131223.GA28009@austin.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040430150256.25735762.akpm@osdl.org>

* Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> [2004-04-30 15:02:56 -0700]:
> Also, I'd be interested in understanding what the input to the hashing
> functions looked like in this testing.  It could be that the new hash just
> happens to work well with one particular test's dataset.  Please convince
> us otherwise ;)

Andrew - Is there any workload you want me to run to show that this hash
function is going to be equal or better that the one already provided
in Linux?

Remember that my claim is not the this hash function will be better for
every IO workload.  I claim it should not have worst performance than
the default hash function but on some workloads it should perform
better.  The workloads that this should show improvements are those that
use GB of memory to store inode and dentry cache data.  I have run some
test on my old BP6 machine and other than a small improvements while
running find, I did not see any improvements but no regressions either.
Again, if you have a particular workload in mind, Ill be happy to run it
on some of my systems.

Thanks,

-JRS

  parent reply	other threads:[~2004-05-04 13:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20040430191539.GC14271@rx8.ibm.com>
     [not found] ` <20040430131832.45be6956.akpm@osdl.org>
2004-04-30 20:57   ` [PATCH] dentry and inode cache hash algorithm performance changes Jose R. Santos
2004-04-30 21:33     ` Jose R. Santos
2004-04-30 22:02       ` Andrew Morton
2004-04-30 23:42         ` Jose R. Santos
2004-05-04 13:12         ` Jose R. Santos [this message]
2004-05-04 18:55           ` Andrew Morton
2004-05-07 13:04             ` Jose R. Santos
2004-05-08  1:03               ` Dave Hansen
2004-04-30 19:55 Jose R. Santos
2004-05-01 12:08 ` Olaf Dietsche
2004-05-01 15:08   ` Jose R. Santos
2004-05-20 13:34     ` Raghavan

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20040504131223.GA28009@austin.ibm.com \
    --to=jrsantos@austin.ibm.com \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=anton@samba.org \
    --cc=dheger@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox