on 19/10/2010 00:01 Giovanni Trematerra said the following: > On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Andriy Gapon <a...@freebsd.org> wrote: >> Again, not sure if I follow you, I don't see relation between per-cpu caches >> and >> dynamic slab size. > > Your patch seems just a work around about initial slab size where the > keg is backed.
Well, setting aside my confusion with the terminology - yes, the patch is just that, and precisely because I only tried to solve that particular problem. > Having dynamic slab sizes would allow to have the keg backed on a larger slab > without going OFFPAGE. I agree in principle. But without seeing code that implements that I can't guess if it would really be more efficient or more maintainable, i.e. more useful in general. Still a very good idea. -- Andriy Gapon _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
