On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 01:42:35AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 12:02:37PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > But just for fun--I did some cleanup and fixed some other quadratic > > behavior here and can notice a difference on lookups of very deep > > subdirectories. > > > > For example I'm seeing an uncached lookup of an 8000-deep directory > > taking about 6 seconds, and can get that down to a tenth of a second. > > > > I'm not sure yet if the difference on less extreme examples is really > > significant, I need to experiment some more. > > > > I'll do some more review and post patches and results. > > This sounds like and awesome improvement. Nobody should be nesting that deep, but maybe it's useful to have the insurance against bad behavior anyway. > How much code do you have to > add for it? fs/exportfs/expfs.c | 224 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------- 1 file changed, 112 insertions(+), 112 deletions(-) But maybe I removed some necessary complication. I'll post the patches.... --b. -- 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
