Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751117AbWE0AJg (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 May 2006 20:09:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751149AbWE0AJg (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 May 2006 20:09:36 -0400 Received: from mail21.syd.optusnet.com.au ([211.29.133.158]:58253 "EHLO mail21.syd.optusnet.com.au") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751117AbWE0AJf (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 May 2006 20:09:35 -0400 From: Con Kolivas To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/33] Adaptive read-ahead V12 Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 10:08:41 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Cc: Folkert van Heusden , Andi Kleen , Andrew Morton , wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn, mstone@mathom.us References: <348469535.17438@ustc.edu.cn> <20060526235436.GD4294@vanheusden.com> <200605271000.12061.kernel@kolivas.org> In-Reply-To: <200605271000.12061.kernel@kolivas.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200605271008.42137.kernel@kolivas.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1573 Lines: 33 On Saturday 27 May 2006 10:00, Con Kolivas wrote: > On Saturday 27 May 2006 09:54, Folkert van Heusden wrote: > > > > These are nice-looking numbers, but one wonders. If optimising > > > > readahead makes this much difference to postgresql performance then > > > > postgresql should be doing the readahead itself, rather than relying > > > > upon the kernel's ability to guess what the application will be doing > > > > in the future. Because surely the database can do a better job of > > > > that than the kernel. > > > > > > With that argument we should remove all readahead from the kernel? > > > Because it's already trying to guess what the application will do. > > > I suspect it's better to have good readahead code in the kernel > > > than in a zillion application. > > > > Maybe a pluggable read-ahead system could be implemented. > > Pluggable anything is unpopular with Linus and other maintainers. See > pluggable cpu scheduler and pluggable page replacement policy (vm) > patchsets. Sorry I should have been clearer. The belief is that certain infrastructure components do not benefit from a pluggable framework, and readeahead probably comes under that description. It's not like Linus was implying we should only have one filesystem for example, since filesystems are afterall pluggable features. -- -ck - 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/