Re: Postal 56% waits for flock_lock_file_wait

[Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>]

On Mon, Oct 02, 2006 at 06:51:56PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
 > Ar Llu, 2006-10-02 am 13:11 -0400, ysgrifennodd Trond Myklebust:
 > > Ext3 does not use flock() in order to lock its journal. The performance
 > > issues that he is seeing may well be due to the journalling, but that
 > > has nothing to do with flock_lock_file_wait.
 > 
 > The ext3 journal also generally speaking improves many-writer
 > performance as do the reservations so the claim seems odd on that basis
 > too. Rerun the test on a gigabyte iRam or similar and you'll see where
 > the non-media bottlenecks actually are

"or similar" maybe. The iRam is pretty much junk in my experience[*].
It rarely survives a mkfs, let alone sustained high throughput I/O.
(And yes, I did try multiple DIMMs, including ones which survive
 memtest86 just fine).

Another "Boots Windows, ship it" QA disaster afaics.

	Dave

[*] And from googling/talking with other owners, my experiences aren't unique.

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
-
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/