Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 14:40:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 14:39:59 -0500 Received: from roc-24-169-102-121.rochester.rr.com ([24.169.102.121]:37895 "EHLO roc-24-169-102-121.rochester.rr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 14:39:47 -0500 Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 14:38:56 -0500 From: Chris Mason To: Steve Lord cc: Jeremy Hansen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: scsi vs ide performance on fsync's Message-ID: <412990000.983561936@tiny> In-Reply-To: <200103021925.f22JPPU02085@jen.americas.sgi.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.0.6b4 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday, March 02, 2001 01:25:25 PM -0600 Steve Lord wrote: >> 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. filemap_fdatawait, filemap_fdatasync, and fsync_inode_buffers all restrict their scans to a list of dirty buffers for that specific file. Only file_fsync goes through all the dirty buffers on the device, and the ext2 fsync path never calls file_fsync. Or am I missing something? -chris - 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/