Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932435AbWAKSYK (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jan 2006 13:24:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932445AbWAKSYK (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jan 2006 13:24:10 -0500 Received: from mta01.mail.tds.net ([216.170.230.81]:45463 "EHLO mta01.mail.tds.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932435AbWAKSYJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jan 2006 13:24:09 -0500 Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 12:23:44 -0600 (CST) From: David Lloyd To: Kenny Simpson cc: linux kernel Subject: Re: Is user-space AIO dead? In-Reply-To: <20060111181252.61498.qmail@web34103.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: References: <20060111181252.61498.qmail@web34103.mail.mud.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 949 Lines: 22 On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Kenny Simpson wrote: > Hi, > Having read the excellent paper by IBM presented at the 2003 OLS about Asynchronous I/O Support > in Linux 2.5, I found the conclusion rather disappointing: > "In conclusion, there appears to be no conditions for raw or O_DIRECT access under which AIO can > show a noticable benefit." - p385. > http://archive.linuxsymposium.org/ols2003/Proceedings/All-Reprints/Reprint-Pulavarty-OLS2003.pdf > > Is this still the case? > > If I want a transactional engine (like a database) that needs to persist to stable storage, is it > still best to use a helper thread to do write/fsync or O_SYNC|O_DIRECT? Wouldn't nonblocking I/O on regular files be nice? - D - 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/