Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> writes: > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 08:37:40AM +0900, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote: >> >> Well, anyway, it is simple. This issue was came as the performance >> regression when I was experimenting to use kernel bdi flusher from own >> flusher. The issue was sync(2) like I said. And this was just I >> couldn't solve this issue by tux3 side unlike other optimizations. > > A performance regression using fsstress? That's not a program > intended to be a useful benchmark for measuring performance. Right. fsstress is used as stress tool for me too as part of CI, with background vmstat 1. Anyway, it is why I noticed this. I agree it would not be high priority. But I don't think we should stop to optimize it. Thanks. -- OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
