On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Bosko Milekic wrote:
> First of all, I'm not "blowing off" anyone's comments. I don't
> appreciate the fact that you're eagerly instructing me to "not blow off
> comments" (which I didn't do to begin with) without providing any more
> constructive feedback.
>
> All I pointed out was that the optimal block size is merely changed
> from an exact 2k, 4k, 8k, etc. to something slightly smaller. What
> point are *you* trying to put across? Tell me what's bad about that
> or, better:
>
> Do you have a better suggestion to make? What do *you* suggest we do
> with the external ref. counts? Please, spare me the flame bait. I
> wasn't being confrontational when I answered Luigi's post and I don't
> need anyone turning this into something confrontational. Thanks.
>
> --
> Bosko Milekic
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Whoa man, that must have across completely wrong. I didn't mean to
imply any confrontational at all. Actually, if anything I was just
trying to restate what should be obvious (and which I think was the point
Luigi already made): that for better or worse userland apps think that
using power-of-2 write buffers will improve performance.
You're right, I don't understand all of the issues well enough to
suggest an alternative. And if it weren't for the fact the just about
every engineer on the planet has had the "power-of-2 good" rule drilled
into them, I would have kept my mouth shut as I usually do. When I saw
you suggesting that the optimum size would just be a little lower without
mentioning POLA, an alarm went off in my head.
In any event, I'll go crawl back into my corner now.
Kelly
--
Kelly Yancey -- kbyanc@{posi.net,FreeBSD.org}
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
