public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joel Becker <Joel.Becker@oracle.com>
To: "Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@redhat.com>
Cc: David Teigland <teigland@redhat.com>,
	Mark Fasheh <mark.fasheh@oracle.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1a/7] dlm: core locking
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 10:19:15 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050428171915.GE4747@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1114696137.1920.32.camel@sisko.sctweedie.blueyonder.co.uk>

On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 02:48:57PM +0100, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
> reduce the latency for this case.  My gut feeling, though, is that I'd
> still prefer to see the DLM doing its work properly, cluster-wide in
> this case, as precaution against accidents if we get inconsistent states
> on disk leading to two nodes trying to create the same lock at once. 
> Experience suggests that such things *do* go wrong, and it's as well to
> plan for them --- early detection is good!

	And unacceptably slow.  With LKM_LOCAL, OCFS2 approaches ext3
speed untarring a kernel tree, because everything under the toplevel
directory is a candidate for LKM_LOCAL.  Network communication may be
fast, but pagecache operations are even faster.  I don't know by how
much, but I bet if we turned off LKM_LOCAL in the OCFS2 DLM, we'd lose a
lot of speed.

Joel

-- 

 One look at the From:
 understanding has blossomed
 .procmailrc grows
	- Alexander Viro

Joel Becker
Senior Member of Technical Staff
Oracle
E-mail: joel.becker@oracle.com
Phone: (650) 506-8127


  reply	other threads:[~2005-04-28 17:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-04-25 16:57 [PATCH 1a/7] dlm: core locking David Teigland
2005-04-25 17:40 ` Nish Aravamudan
2005-04-25 21:17 ` Jesper Juhl
2005-04-26  5:10   ` Daniel Phillips
2005-04-26  8:43   ` David Teigland
2005-04-25 22:46 ` Pavel Machek
2005-04-27 14:48 ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-27 21:41 ` Mark Fasheh
2005-04-28  2:41   ` Daniel Phillips
2005-04-28 12:21     ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2005-04-29  8:05       ` Daniel Phillips
2005-04-28  3:45   ` David Teigland
2005-04-28 13:48     ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2005-04-28 17:19       ` Joel Becker [this message]
2005-04-29  8:10         ` Daniel Phillips
2005-04-29 21:52           ` Mark Fasheh
2005-04-30  0:50             ` Daniel Phillips
2005-04-28 19:21     ` Mark Fasheh
2005-04-29  5:56       ` David Teigland

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=20050428171915.GE4747@ca-server1.us.oracle.com \
    --to=joel.becker@oracle.com \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.fasheh@oracle.com \
    --cc=sct@redhat.com \
    --cc=teigland@redhat.com \
    /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