On 20.02.2011 21:02, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 6:35 PM, Mark Mielke wrote:
That said, I'm also (in principle) against implementing cache of open file
handles. I prefer architectures that cache intermediate data in a processed
form that the application has made a determined
On 20.02.2011 09:50, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 22:37, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
The fopen() calls should be eliminated by the
file handle cache. IOW, they should already be
addressed on the performance branch. Please
let me know if that is not the case.
Just my 20 cents.
High r
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 6:35 PM, Mark Mielke wrote:
> On 02/20/2011 03:50 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 22:37, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
>>>
>>> The fopen() calls should be eliminated by the
>>> file handle cache. IOW, they should already be
>>> addressed on the performance br
On 02/20/2011 03:50 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 22:37, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
The fopen() calls should be eliminated by the
file handle cache. IOW, they should already be
addressed on the performance branch. Please
let me know if that is not the case.
My belief that file han
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 22:37, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
> The fopen() calls should be eliminated by the
> file handle cache. IOW, they should already be
> addressed on the performance branch. Please
> let me know if that is not the case.
>
Just my 20 cents.
My belief that file handles cache should
On 24.01.2011 03:12, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 8:37 PM, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
On 29.12.2010 01:58, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
The current code is written in a certain way, not particularly
optimized for this new format (I seem to remember "log" does around 10
fopen calls for
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 8:37 PM, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
> On 29.12.2010 01:58, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Stefan Fuhrmann
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 19.10.2010 15:10, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Greg Stein wrote on Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 04:31:42 -0400:
>
>
On 29.12.2010 01:58, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Stefan Fuhrmann
wrote:
On 19.10.2010 15:10, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Greg Stein wrote on Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 04:31:42 -0400:
Personally, I see [FSv2] as a broad swath of API changes to align our
needs with the underlyi
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Stefan Fuhrmann
wrote:
> On 19.10.2010 15:10, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>>
>> Greg Stein wrote on Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 04:31:42 -0400:
>>>
>>> Personally, I see [FSv2] as a broad swath of API changes to align our
>>> needs with the underlying storage. Trowbridge noted t
9 matches
Mail list logo