Re: nfs performance - idea.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



2012/11/29 Myklebust, Trond <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx>:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Łukasz Tasz [mailto:lukasz@xxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 8:47 AM
>> To: Myklebust, Trond
>> Cc: Adrien Kunysz; linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: nfs performance - idea.
>>
>> Hi, thanks a lot for answer,
>>
>> looks then even better! so to be 100% sure it good to traverse whole path
>> and open directory content.
>
> No. All you really need is the opendir(). If you want to make your own hack, all you need is a program that does something along the lines of
>
> DIR* p = opendir(".");
> if (p)
>      closedir(p);
>
I think I got what you mean, but in case of ./a/b/c/d/e
just opendir('./a/b/c/d/e') could end with "No such file or directory"

that's why I'm thinking about:
for d in "./a/b/c/d/e".split('/')
   opendir(d)


>> One remark, since I did not mentioned it, I'm using NFSv3, is this behavior
>> same in NFSv3 and NFSv4?
>
> Yes. It is a consequence of the NFS close-to-open caching model, which is common to all versions of NFS.
great,
could you please point me to document/manual which describe this model?

thanks a lot for your help!
Łukasz

>
>> thanks & regards
>> Lukasz Tasz
>> Łukasz Tasz
>>
>>
>> 2012/11/29 Myklebust, Trond <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx>:
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: linux-nfs-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-nfs-
>> >> owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Lukasz Tasz
>> >> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 4:41 AM
>> >> To: Adrien Kunysz
>> >> Cc: linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> Subject: Re: nfs performance - idea.
>> >>
>> >> Any idea on this topic?
>> >>
>> >> Can I assume that "touch" could be interface for triggering
>> >> synchronising client state with server state?
>> >>
>> >
>> > 'ls' is better. All opendir() calls will trigger a revalidation of the directory
>> cache.
>> >
>> >
>> >> many thanks for help!
>> >> regards
>> >> Lukasz Tasz
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2012/11/14 Adrien Kunysz <adk@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> >> > On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Łukasz Tasz <lukasz@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> >> Hi all,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I would like to consult some idea with you,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Problem:
>> >> >> I have two processes which are doing some actions and one of the
>> >> >> action is done on a shared file system.
>> >> >> Issue is that this thing could be done only by one process, and
>> >> >> for this issue, locking mechanism is implemented.
>> >> >> Problem is that while one process is releasing lock, second one is
>> >> >> informed that file processing is finished, but unfortunately files
>> >> >> does not exists in context of second process.
>> >> >> Two processes are executed on two different hosts. NFS share is
>> >> >> mounted in a standard way, no special flag.
>> >> >> Problem I guess is with caches, lookupcache=none solves the
>> >> >> problem, but also causes others :) - performance.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I know, it not possible to have all things at once - no complains.
>> >> >> But simple idea is that inside second process after notification
>> >> >> that files are generated execute touch function on directory which
>> >> >> holds files, This will cause unnecessary update of modification
>> >> >> date, but as a side effect I noticed  that also file gets visible
>> >> >> immediately on client hosts.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> That's why my question is if this is expected and reasonable
>> behaviour?
>> >> >> At the end I'm looking for kind of 'sync' command which will cause
>> >> >> synchronization of directories content inside client and server
>> >> >> something like flush() - but in NFS it's more complex.
>> >> >
>> >> > Doesn't fsync(2) do what you want? If not, can you explain why?
>> >> >
>> >> >> thanks in advance for help,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> regards
>> >> >> Lukasz
>> >> --
>> >> 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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux USB Development]     [Linux Media Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Info]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux