Re: [PATCH] fadvise(2) system call
- From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 22:57:23 +1100
Right, that's why Squid/Lusca sucks much less there. The IO is done
using a pool of threads.
I bet in the torrent client case, massive speedups could be done with
correct use of either IO threads, or the POSIX AIO library.
I'm all for using fadvise() to hint to the OS about what's about to
happen (and I'll start leveraging it myself once it hits the tree) but
there are other ways to skin this cat..
Adrian
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] fadvise(2) system call
- From: Lev Serebryakov
- Re: [PATCH] fadvise(2) system call
- References:
- [PATCH] fadvise(2) system call
- From: John Baldwin
- Re: [PATCH] fadvise(2) system call
- From: Doug Barton
- Re: [PATCH] fadvise(2) system call
- From: Lev Serebryakov
- Re: [PATCH] fadvise(2) system call
- From: Adrian Chadd
- Re: [PATCH] fadvise(2) system call
- From: Lev Serebryakov
- Re: [PATCH] fadvise(2) system call
- From: Adrian Chadd
- Re: [PATCH] fadvise(2) system call
- From: Lev Serebryakov
- [PATCH] fadvise(2) system call
- Prev by Date: Re: /etc/localtime problems
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] fadvise(2) system call
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] fadvise(2) system call
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] fadvise(2) system call
- Index(es):