lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: msync() behaviour broken for MS_ASYNC, revert patch?
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> I don't think anyone would use MS_ASYNC for anything other than
> performance improvement, so it is not like we need super well
> defined behaviour... the earlier it will start IO AFAIKS the better.

Well, no. Consider a continuously-running application which modifies its
data store via MAP_SHARED+msync(MS_ASYNC). If the msync() immediately
started I/O, the disk would be seeking all over the place all the time. The
queue merging and timer-based unplugging would help here, but it won't be
as good as a big, infrequent ascending-file-offset pdflush pass.

Secondly, consider the behaviour of the above application if it is modifying
the same page relatively frequently (quite likely). If MS_ASYNC starts I/O
immediately, that page will get written 10, 100 or 1000 times per second.
If MS_ASYNC leaves it to pdflush, that page gets written once per 30
seconds, so we do far much less I/O.

We just don't know. It's better to leave it up to the application designer
rather than lumping too many operations into the one syscall.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-02-10 05:17    [W:0.818 / U:0.640 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site