>>>>> "Ingo" == Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> writes:
Ingo> On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Anton Blanchard wrote:
>> There were a few solutions (from davem and ingo) to allocate a larger
>> hash but with the radix patch we no longer have to worry about this.
Ingo> there is one big issue we forgot to consider.
Ingo> in the case of radix trees it's not only search depth that gets worse with
Hmm, worse, yes, the same way as page tables get "worse" with larger
address spaces.
Ingo> big files. The thing i'm worried about is the 'big pagecache lock' being
Ingo> reintroduced again. If eg. a database application puts lots of data into a
Yes, though I'd strongly suspect big database engines can/should/do
benefit from doing their application specific caching and indexing,
outperforming whatever cache implementation the OS has.
Ingo> single file (multiple gigabytes - why not), then the
mapping-> i_shared_lock becomes a 'big pagecache lock' again, causing
Ingo> serious SMP contention for even the read() case. Benchmarks show that it's
Ingo> the distribution of locks that matters on big boxes.
So, we can use a read-write spinlock instead ->i_shared_lock, ok ?
Regards,
-velco
-
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 : Thu Feb 07 2002 - 21:00:11 EST