Re: O_DIRECT! or O_DIRECT?

From: Miquel van Smoorenburg (miquels@cistron-office.nl)
Date: Wed Jul 04 2001 - 13:27:13 EST


In article <20010704185230.F28793@redhat.com>,
Stephen C. Tweedie <sct@redhat.com> wrote:
>For these reasons, buffered IO is often faster than O_DIRECT for pure
>sequential access. The downside it its greater CPU cost and the fact
>that it pollutes the cache (which, in turn, causes even _more_ CPU
>overhead when the VM is forced to start reclaiming old cache data to
>make room for new blocks.)

Any chance of something like O_SEQUENTIAL (like madvise(MADV_SEQUENTIAL))

Mike.

-
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/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jul 07 2001 - 21:00:14 EST