Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756028AbXFDOj3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jun 2007 10:39:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754619AbXFDOjW (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jun 2007 10:39:22 -0400 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.181]:16998 "EHLO wa-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754486AbXFDOjV (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jun 2007 10:39:21 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=cI1JKtOUFR0kXJCCtjmcK+n9QS+Xz6PIQm1Bq0uIdV6mQntOEu4xDQjjp1WlZA3Qw0/ELpaCyocPQN/bsmj7CpTQkipN1rZmgXAy58pTPD0tjcSwVatfPRMFtIuoyED21wJjk/O0bnWZLoEMgfSB3AibrPimJob7NiR+SFTypyk= Message-ID: Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 10:39:20 -0400 From: "Aaron Wiebe" To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: slow open() calls and o_nonblock In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1382 Lines: 30 Sorry for the unthreaded responses, I wasn't cc'd here, so I'm replying to these based on mailing list archives.... Al Viro wrote: > BTW, why close these suckers all the time? It's not that kernel would > be unable to hold thousands of open descriptors for your process... > Hash descriptors by pathname and be done with that; don't bother with > close unless you decide that you've got too many of them (e.g. when you > get a hash conflict). A valid point - I currently keep a pool of 4000 descriptors open and cycle them out based on inactivity. I hadn't seriously considered just keeping them all open, because I simply wasn't sure how well things would go with 100,000 files open. Would my backend storage keep up... would the kernel mind maintaining 100,000 files open over NFS? The majority of the files would simply be idle - I would be keeping file handles open for no reason. Pooling allows me to substantially drop the number of opens I require, but I am hesitant to blow the pool size to substantially higher numbers. Can anyone shed light on any issues that may come up with a massive pool size, such as 128k? -Aaron - 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/