On 07Mar2008 14:31, Nathan Grennan <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > David Boles wrote: >> >> Okay. Still trying to understand this. >> >> Is the 'fsync' problem, the differences for you, with the same page? I ask >> because so many pages are so very active today. If it is a page, or >> several? If you would like I would try them from here. >> > It doesn't matter so much about the page. Any page will do. From my limited > testing it did it on every page. It was like click bookmark, page loads, > gets to end of loading, eight fsyncs within a second of each other. Click > another bookmark, page loads, gets to end of loading, eight fsyncs. A significant change from FF2 to FF3 is the use of sqlite3 for the bookmarks/session/history state storage. It would not surprise me if sqlite were doing fsyncs at strategic points to ensure db consistency. I know I moved a gdbm dependent app (bogofilter) off into a /dev/shm cache to avoid a similar fsync storm last year sometime. Just a thought. -- Cameron Simpson <cs@xxxxxxxxxx> DoD#743 -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
