Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 26 May 2006 10:53:29 +0100 | From | Just Marc <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/33] Adaptive read-ahead V12 |
| |
Hi,
>If the developers of that program want to squeeze the last 5% out of it >then sure, I'd expect them to use such OS-provided I/O scheduling >facilities. Database developers do that sort of thing all the time. > >We have an application which knows what it's doing sending IO requests to >the kernel which must then try to reverse engineer what the application is >doing via this rather inappropriate communication channel. > >Is that dumb, or what? > > Given that the application already knows what it's doing, it's in a much >better position to issue the anticipatory IO requests than is the kernel.
What about a performance driven application (A web server) that's using say sendfile() in order to reduce the overhead of context switching, how would this application do its own read-ahead "management" effectively?
Thanks
- 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/
| |