Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758530AbZDCAyZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Apr 2009 20:54:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752343AbZDCAyQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Apr 2009 20:54:16 -0400 Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com ([209.85.200.171]:44526 "EHLO wf-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751504AbZDCAyP convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Apr 2009 20:54:15 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=T1vnWGFPUR/7viqh0SGHYrY39yDoh2RSwYNRT89526Aq3Wd+xMRpZDc9M/laBh/ukC Nkc93YH7eXSaCvbaxaww9gVzKbq3201jgMvLF7CJ6O7ECFoT4fiXLIhJBLba+/HGmwoO ZG54XZjkcPvDTxo4Z/NqXbrtrodIadWWx6IIA= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <49CCCB0A.6070701@nokia.com> <9b1675090904021724t2fb0a671uc10d8e7bcba0bc5c@mail.gmail.com> <9b1675090904021728y35776377u327f2266d06e2f29@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 18:54:14 -0600 Message-ID: <9b1675090904021754v3bcbb8cemd746c0d5f24362a4@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: EXT4-ish "fixes" in UBIFS From: "Trenton D. Adams" To: Christian Kujau Cc: Artem Bityutskiy , Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1190 Lines: 23 On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Christian Kujau wrote: > On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Trenton D. Adams wrote: >> Oh, I should have clarified. ?It improves performance under heavy >> load. ?Under normal load, mounting without sync is fine. ?What I tend >> to do is mount with "remount,rw,sync" when heavy load is starting. > > Really? How does mounting with "-o sync" *improve* performance? I am > certainly aware that mounting with "-o sync" has severe performance > impacts, but was proposing it anyway *only* to tackle the data integrity > problem. However, I'm curious if usescaes in the embedded world are > equally affected by this. > Oh, well for my system, if I do heavy IO, my *fsync* performance drops like a rock. fsync on even 1M takes 15-20 seconds at times. I have even seen 50 seconds. If I mount with sync option, the fsyncs of 1M take only a couple hundred milliseconds, while the other heavy IO is happening. -- 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/