Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752294AbWCKB5e (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Mar 2006 20:57:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752290AbWCKB5d (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Mar 2006 20:57:33 -0500 Received: from quechua.inka.de ([193.197.184.2]:28335 "EHLO mail.inka.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752064AbWCKB5d (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Mar 2006 20:57:33 -0500 Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 02:57:31 +0100 From: Bernd Eckenfels To: Mark Fasheh Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com Subject: Re: [Ocfs2-devel] Ocfs2 performance Message-ID: <20060311015731.GA16912@lina.inka.de> References: <20060310002121.GJ27280@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> <20060311010913.GN27280@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060311010913.GN27280@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 821 Lines: 19 On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 05:09:13PM -0800, Mark Fasheh wrote: > until the locks needs to be upgraded or downgraded. This provides a very > large performance increase over always asking the DLM for a new lock. Yes, it is basically the same problem as the buffer cache. Excessive single-use patterns dirty the small cache or require a too big cache to be usefull. Maybe a user specific limit of percentage of hash (and locks) used? I mean the untar test case is a bit synthetic, but think of concurrent read access in a cluster of nntp servers (news article pool). 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/