From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: raz ben yehuda <raziebe@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Huge XFS regression in 2.6.32 upto 2.6.38
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 18:06:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110412160633.GA3427@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1302594748.2750.11.camel@raz.scalemp.com>
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:52:28AM +0300, raz ben yehuda wrote:
> Christoph Hello
> I am testing 2.6.38 with AIM benchmark.
> I compared 2.6.38 to 2.6.27 and I noticed that 2.6.27 is much better than 2.6.38 when
> doing sync random writes test over an xfs regular file over native Linux partition on top common sata disk.
As Dave already mentioned in your double post of this mail this is
because data now actually is forced out to disk in all cases,
while you previously hit a bug in the O_SYNC implementation.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-12 16:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-12 7:52 Huge XFS regression in 2.6.32 upto 2.6.38 raz ben yehuda
2011-04-12 16:06 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
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=20110412160633.GA3427@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=raziebe@gmail.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