Re: Postal 56% waits for flock_lock_file_wait

On 10/1/06, Trond Myklebust <[email protected]> wrote:

I still don't get it. The job of the flock() system call is to sleep if
someone already holds the lock, and then grab the lock when it is
released. If that is not what the user expects, then the user has the
option of not calling flock(). This has nothing to do with open().

Trond

If I understand Leonid correctly, I think what he is saying is ext3
does not scale very well when you have a large number of processes
acessing file system because of locks in journal.    This is seen in
the excessive idle time.  By comparison, ext2 does not have this
issue.

Tim
-
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: Postal 56% waits for flock_lock_file_wait
    • From: Trond Myklebust <[email protected]>

• References:
  • RE: Postal 56% waits for flock_lock_file_wait
    • From: "Ananiev, Leonid I" <[email protected]>
  • RE: Postal 56% waits for flock_lock_file_wait
    • From: Trond Myklebust <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: wpa supplicant/ipw3945, ESSID last char missing
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 4/4] fdtable: Implement new pagesize-based fdtable allocation scheme.
• Previous by thread: RE: Postal 56% waits for flock_lock_file_wait
• Next by thread: Re: Postal 56% waits for flock_lock_file_wait
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]