On Wed, 25 Nov 2015, Nick Fisk wrote: > > > Yes I think that should definitely be an improvement. I can't quite > > > get my head around how it will perform in instances where you miss 1 > > > hitset but all others are a hit. Like this: > > > > > > H H H M H H H H H H H H > > > > > > And recency is set to 8 for example. It maybe that it doesn't have > > > much effect on the overall performance. It might be that there is a > > > strong separation of really hot blocks and hot blocks, but this could > > > turn out to be a good thing. > > > > Yeah... In the above case recency 3 would be enough (or 9, depending on > > whether that's chronological or reverse chronological order). Doing an N out > > of M or similar is a bit more flexible and probably something we should add > > on top. (Or, we could change recency to be N/M instead of just > > N.) > > N out of M, is that similar to what I came up with but combined with the > N most recent sets? Yeah > If you can wait a couple of days I will run the PR > in its current state through my test box and see how it looks. Sounds great, thanks. > Just a quick question, is there a way to just make+build the changed > files/package or select just to build the main ceph.deb. I'm just using > " sudo dpkg-buildpackage" at the moment and its really slowing down any > testing I'm doing waiting for everything to rebuild. You can probably 'make ceph-osd' and manualy copy that binary into place, assuming distro matches your build and test environments... sage _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |