r205231
Pawel Jakub Dawidek
pjd at FreeBSD.org
Wed Sep 18 13:51:54 UTC 2013
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 02:08:50PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>
> Guys,
>
> I would like to ask your opinion of r205231, specifically the part that splits
> the state lists.
> The change is quite large. I can admit that I do not fully understand it. And
> it introduces many differences to the upstream code which makes merges quite a
> bit harder.
AFAIR Kip observed this contention for workload with multiple sequential
streams, like video streaming or something.
If it really reduces contention and we can prove it then I think it
would be nice to upstream the change. My guess would be that it does
help, the hard part might be to find a case where it is clearly visible.
I'm also not fun of hardcoding numer of locks to 16. It should scale
with the number of cores at least.
--
Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.wheelsystems.com
FreeBSD committer http://www.FreeBSD.org
Am I Evil? Yes, I Am! http://mobter.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/zfs-devel/attachments/20130918/b6faa40c/attachment.sig>
More information about the zfs-devel
mailing list