Re: [patch 00/14] Page cache cleanup in anticipation of LargeBlocksize support

[Andrew Morton]

> On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 14:20:04 -0700 (PDT) Christoph Lameter <clameter@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I think the best way to proceed would be to investigate that _general_
> > optimisation and then, based upon the results of that work, decide whether
> > further _specialised_ changes such as variable PAGE_CACHE_SIZE are needed,
> > and if so, what they should be.
> 
> As has been pointed out performance is only one beneficial issue of
> having a higher page cache. It is doubtful in principle that the proposed 
> alternative can work given that locking overhead and management overhead
> by the VM are not minimized but made more complex by your envisioned 
> solution.

Why do we have to replay all of this?

You: conceptully-new add-on which benefits 0.25% of the user base, provided
they select the right config options and filesystem.

Me: simpler enhancement which benefits 100% of the user base (ie: includes
4k blocksize, 4k pagesize) and which also fixes your performance problem
with that HBA.


We want the 100% case.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/