I think the OP was saying he had bad performance specifically on debian,
not with small files in general--although your point is valid. Small files
are the bane of any caching scheme.
Paul
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, David Howells wrote:
Holger Kaelberer <hkaelber@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
With this setting I get very bad performance when reading many small
files.
When you get a cache miss, you pay a penalty for doing a lookup in the cache,
as you then have to create various directories and a file and slap xattrs on
them. Each time you look up a new file you pay this penalty again. So if
you're dealing with a lot of small files it's going to hurt you more than a
few big files.
That's one of the tradeoffs you have to make. You have to decide if the
overhead of using the cache is worth it with respect to your network latency
and bandwidth.
David
--
Linux-cachefs mailing list
Linux-cachefs@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cachefs
--
----------
# pwd
/loony/bin
----------
