Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752136AbWCJBOM (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Mar 2006 20:14:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752155AbWCJBOM (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Mar 2006 20:14:12 -0500 Received: from quechua.inka.de ([193.197.184.2]:35235 "EHLO mail.inka.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752136AbWCJBOK (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Mar 2006 20:14:10 -0500 From: be-news06@lina.inka.de (Bernd Eckenfels) To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Ocfs2-devel] Ocfs2 performance Organization: Private Site running Debian GNU/Linux In-Reply-To: <20060310002121.GJ27280@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> X-Newsgroups: ka.lists.linux.kernel User-Agent: tin/1.7.8-20050315 ("Scalpay") (UNIX) (Linux/2.6.13.4 (i686)) Message-Id: Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 02:14:08 +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 929 Lines: 22 Mark Fasheh wrote: > Your hash sizes are still ridiculously large. How long are those entries in the buckets kept? I mean if I untar a tree the files are only locked while extracted, afterwards they are owner-less... (I must admint I dont understand ocfs2 very deeply, but maybe explaining why so many active locks need to be cached might help to find an optimized way. > By the way, an interesting thing happened when I recently switched disk > arrays - the fluctuations in untar times disappeared. The new array is much > nicer, while the old one was basically Just A Bunch Of Disks. Also, sync > times dropped dramatically. Writeback Cache? Gruss Bernd - 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/