Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 14:27:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 14:27:27 -0500 Received: from [38.204.212.32] ([38.204.212.32]:43978 "HELO srv2.ecropolis.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 14:27:17 -0500 Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 14:27:08 -0500 (EST) From: Jeremy Hansen X-X-Sender: To: Steve Lord cc: Chris Mason , Subject: Re: scsi vs ide performance on fsync's In-Reply-To: <200103021925.f22JPPU02085@jen.americas.sgi.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2 Mar 2001, Steve Lord wrote: > > > > > > On Friday, March 02, 2001 12:39:01 PM -0600 Steve Lord wrote: > > > > [ file_fsync syncs all dirty buffers on the FS ] > > > > > > So it looks like fsync is going to cost more for bigger devices. Given the > > > O_SYNC changes Stephen Tweedie did, couldnt fsync look more like this: > > > > > > down(&inode->i_sem); > > > filemap_fdatasync(ip->i_mapping); > > > fsync_inode_buffers(ip); > > > filemap_fdatawait(ip->i_mapping); > > > up(&inode->i_sem); > > > > > > > reiserfs might need to trigger a commit on fsync, so the fs specific fsync > > op needs to be called. But, you should not need to call file_fsync in the > > XFS fsync call (check out ext2's) > > > Right, this was just a generic example, the fsync_inode_buffers would be in > the filesystem specific fsync callout - this was more of a logical > example of what ext2 could do. XFS does completely different stuff in there > anyway. > > > > > For why ide is beating scsi in this benchmark...make sure tagged queueing > > is on (or increase the queue length?). For the xlog.c test posted, I would > > expect scsi to get faster than ide as the size of the write increases. > > I think the issue is the call being used now is going to get slower the > larger the device is, just from the point of view of how many buffers it > has to scan. Well, I tried making the device smaller, creating just a 9gig partition on the raid array and this made no different in the xlog results. -jeremy > > > > -chris > > Steve > > > -- this is my sig. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/