On 11/01/2010 01:01 PM, Dan Smith wrote: > OL> Does this patch solve the performance problem in freeing all > OL> the objhash entries upfront (e.g. before letting userspace > OL> resume) ? > > OL> If so, is there still a performance hit for doing the 'clear' > OL> portion early before resuming the tasks ? How much does it > OL> depend on the complexity of the hierarchy being checkpointed ? > > I've actually been unable to detect any real different in performance > between this and the way it was before. I've run it against several > different large checkpoints (multiple processes, with sockets, IPC, > many files open, etc). I have another option for the functionality, > which is to mark only specific items as needing to be free()'d early, > but I can't discern a difference between that or this option either. > What I can discern is that this patch is more likely to prevent > similar issues in the future by making the behavior of the hash far > more generally correct, IMHO. So to be clear: is there a performance issue due to moving the cleanup - some or all - to before allowing tasks to resume ? (This is what I understood over IRC). I agree that it's more correct and safe this way. But I want to know what the implications of a (or any) fix we make. Oren. _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
