Thomas Glanzmann wrote:
For tar I have no idea why it should slow down the operation, but maybe you can enlighten us.
Directory hashing slows down operations that do linear sweeps through the filesystem reading every single file, simply because without dir_index, there is likely to be a correlation between inode order and directory order, whereas with dir_index, readdir() returns entries in hash order.
-hpa - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks
- From: Thomas Glanzmann <[email protected]>
- Re: Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks
- References:
- Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks
- From: Matt Mackall <[email protected]>
- Re: Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks
- From: Chris Mason <[email protected]>
- Re: Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks
- From: Magnus Damm <[email protected]>
- Re: Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks
- From: Chris Mason <[email protected]>
- Re: Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks
- From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
- Re: Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks
- From: Florian Weimer <[email protected]>
- Re: Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks
- From: Thomas Glanzmann <[email protected]>
- Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks
- Prev by Date: Re: [10/07] sparc: Fix PTRACE_CONT bogosity
- Next by Date: Re: returning non-ram via ->nopage, was Re: [patch] mspec driver for 2.6.12-rc2-mm3
- Previous by thread: Re: Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks
- Next by thread: Re: Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks
- Index(es):
 |