Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*realtime\s+partition\s+support\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*realtime\s+partition\s+support\?\s*$/: 7 ]

Total 7 documents matching your query.

1. realtime partition support? (score: 1): Author: Phil Karn <karn@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 06:36:16 -0800; What's the status of the realtime partition feature in XFS? I think I read somewhere that it wasn't actually implemented and/or working in the Linux XFS implementation, but I'm not sure. If it is in; /archives/xfs/2011-01/msg00109.html (6,940 bytes)
2. Re: realtime partition support? (score: 1): Author: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2011 13:17:29 +1100; Experimental, implemented in linux and mostly just works, but is largely untested and not really recommended for any sort of production use. Has a couple of drawbacks: realtime device extent allocati; /archives/xfs/2011-01/msg00113.html (9,065 bytes)
3. Re: realtime partition support? (score: 1): Author: Phil Karn <karn@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 19:59:27 -0800; Thanks. My point is that the big win of the SSD comes from its lack of rotational and seek latency. They really shine on random small reads. On large sequential reads and writes, modern rotating disk; /archives/xfs/2011-01/msg00114.html (10,490 bytes)
4. Re: realtime partition support? (score: 1): Author: Stan Hoeppner <stan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2011 00:29:14 -0600; Phil Karn put forth on 1/7/2011 9:59 PM: This is because you're not using Dave's delayed logging patch, and you've not been reading this list for many months, as it's been discussed in detail many ti; /archives/xfs/2011-01/msg00115.html (11,976 bytes)
5. Re: realtime partition support? (score: 1): Author: Phil Karn <karn@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2011 06:42:52 -0800; Yes, I am new to the list, and while I did pull down a year of the archives I certainly haven't read them all. Thanks to this file pointer and your explanation, I now have a pretty good idea of what'; /archives/xfs/2011-01/msg00116.html (9,297 bytes)
6. Re: realtime partition support? (score: 1): Author: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 11:35:06 +1100; Which often does not require IO because the path and inodes are cached in memory. Not that much more quickly, because XFS uses readahead to hide a lot of the directory traversal IO latency when it is; /archives/xfs/2011-01/msg00120.html (10,634 bytes)
7. Re: realtime partition support? (score: 1): Author: Phil Karn <karn@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 02:58:30 -0800; I'm thinking mainly of rapid file creation or deletion, such as tar xjf linux-2.6.37.tar.bz2 rm -rf linux-2.6.37 Most of the paths are likely cached, yes, but a lot of inodes are being rapidly create; /archives/xfs/2011-01/msg00129.html (10,961 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 7
Page: [1]