On 2011-06-08 03:15, Peng Tao wrote: > On 6/8/11, Jim Rees <rees@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Benny Halevy wrote: >> >> NAK. >> This affects all layout types. In particular it is undesired >> for write layouts that extend the file with the objects layout. >> The server can extend the layout segments range >> over what the client requested so why would the client >> ask for artificially large layouts? >> >> This has actually been the subject of some debate over Thursday night >> beers. The problem we're trying to solve is that the client is spending 98% >> of its time in layoutget. This patch gives us something like a 10x >> speedup. But many of us think it's not the right fix. I suggest we discuss >> next week. >> Sure. >> But note that this patch doesn't change anything unless you set the sysctl. > there is a default value of 2M. maybe we can set it to page size by > default so other layout are not affected and block layout can let > users set it by hand if they care about performance. does this make > sense? If doing it at all why use a sysctl rather than a mount option? Or maybe coding the logic for prefetching the layout iff sequential access is detected is the right thing to do. Benny >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
