Seems like also 'mv' events are also not supported by fanotify, like
creation/deletion.
Therefore not an option (for lsyncd) probably. Maybe loggedfs is (if
time permits...).
Thanks for the discussion.
Jos
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>
>
>
red by the application requesting
inotification?
Would something like that be possible?
BTW, I'm not a kernel expert, and not following this list... just
wanted to throw in this idea. Pls Cc: personally.
Thanks,
Jos
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel&q
On 9/17/07, Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> * Rob Hussey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > http://www.healthcarelinen.com/misc/benchmarks/BOUND_hackbench_benchmark2.png
>
> heh - am i the only one impressed by the consistency of the blue line in
> this graph? :-) [ and the green line look
hat Linus has been doing is
preserving it. I think he must not ignore that there is always room
for improvement, and moments like these (where a big 'fight' is going
on, and there is a clear sense of urgency about the matter) are the
perfect times for a good discussion, and possible change.
Op Saturday 28 July 2007, schreef Linus Torvalds:
>
> Compare this to SD for a while. Ponder.
>
> Linus
Your point here seems to be: this is how it went, and it was right. Ok, got
that. Yet, Con walked away (and not just over SD). Seeing Con go, I wonder
how many did leave
ple around you, your 'lieutenants',
is huge. Larger than you might think. And in many cases, ppl following
someone behave more extreme. That's a big reason why the LKML isn't very
polite nor inviting (mind you, I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing,
Op Tuesday 20 March 2007, schreef Linus Torvalds:
> On Mon, 19 Mar 2007, Xavier Bestel wrote:
> > > >> Stock scheduler wins easily, no contest.
> > > >
> > > > What happens when you renice X ?
> > >
> > > Dunno -- not necessary with the stock scheduler.
> >
> > Could you try something like renice -
Op Tuesday 20 March 2007, schreef Bill Davidsen:
> Kasper Sandberg wrote:
> > On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 08:38 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> >> On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 08:22 +0100, Radoslaw Szkodzinski wrote:
> >>> I'd recon KDE regresses because of kioslaves waiting on a pipe
> >>> (communication with t
7;re
doing, I can contact them - the libraries for KDE 4 aren't in feature freeze
yet (they will be, though) so they can solve the problem(s). The KIO
infrastructure is ATM under a redesign, so please, if you know what they
should do/are doing wrong, speak up!
grtz
Jos
pgpurtRxp14WS.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Op Sunday 18 March 2007, schreef Mike Galbraith:
> On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 21:13 -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> > Now for something constructive... by any chance is Mike running KDE
> > instead of GNOME?
>
> Yes.
>
> -Mike
Well, then, it might indeed be the KIOslave/pipe stuff. I experience som
Op Sunday 18 March 2007, schreef Con Kolivas:
> On Monday 12 March 2007 22:26, Al Boldi wrote:
> > Con Kolivas wrote:
> > > On Monday 12 March 2007 15:42, Al Boldi wrote:
> > > > Con Kolivas wrote:
> > > > > On Monday 12 March 2007 08:52, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > > > > > And thank you! I think I know
Op Saturday 17 March 2007, schreef Ingo Molnar:
> * jos poortvliet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Op Saturday 17 March 2007, schreef Ingo Molnar:
> > > so it is not at all clear to me that RSDL is indeed an improvement,
> > > if it does not have comparable auto-ni
doesn't currently take this
pipe-thing into account, it might need some fixing. call it heuristics or not
(after all, how could one NOT say a scheduler uses heuristics of some kind?).
Anyway, relax (you know getting angry won't help you getting better) and
remember this is email
Op Saturday 17 March 2007, schreef Ingo Molnar:
> * Con Kolivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Despite the claims to the contrary, RSDL does not have _less_
> > heuristics, it does not have _any_. It's purely entitlement based.
>
> RSDL still has heuristics very much, but this time it's hardcoded i
and everybody is happy.
If it doesn't solve the problem, more work is in order. I think ignoring a
clear regression to mainline, no matter how rare, isn't smart. It might
indicate an underlying problem, and even if it doesn't - you don't want ppl
complaining the new kern
If RSDL can be improved to help X, great. But introducing again the problem
which RSDL was supposed to solve would be pretty pointless. I think that's
what grumpy Con is trying to say, and he's right at it.
grtz
Jos
--
Disclaimer:
Alles wat ik doe denk en zeg is gebaseerd op het wereldbe
Op Monday 12 March 2007, schreef Con Kolivas:
> On Tuesday 13 March 2007 01:14, Al Boldi wrote:
> > Con Kolivas wrote:
> > > > > The higher priority one always get 6-7ms whereas the lower priority
> > > > > one runs 6-7ms and then one larger perfectly bound expiration
> > > > > amount. Basically ex
Op Monday 12 March 2007, schreef Al Boldi:
> Con Kolivas wrote:
> > > > The higher priority one always get 6-7ms whereas the lower priority
> > > > one runs 6-7ms and then one larger perfectly bound expiration amount.
> > > > Basically exactly as I'd expect. The higher priority task gets
> > > > pr
Op Tuesday 06 March 2007, schreef Willy Tarreau:
> In a way, I think they are right. Let me explain. Pluggable schedulers are
> useful when you want to switch away from the default one. This is very
> useful during development of a new scheduler, as well as when you're not
> satisfied with the defa
Op Monday 05 March 2007, schreef Willy Tarreau:
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 08:49:29AM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
> (...)
>
> > > That's just what it did, but when you "nice make -j4", things (gears)
> > > start to stutter. Is that due to the staircase?
> >
> > gears isn't an interactive task. Apart
but it won't make it in (or at least, it's not likely). So we
can hope this WILL make it into mainline, but I wouldn't count on it.
grtz
Jos
--
Disclaimer:
Alles wat ik doe denk en zeg is gebaseerd op het wereldbeeld wat ik nu heb.
Ik ben niet verantwoordelijk voor wijz
gures like Andrew and Linus play a big role in this. I think you
guys have done a great job until now, and I trust you can keep it that way.
Jos
pgp5QOQY84WMa.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Op Friday 09 February 2007, schreef Con Kolivas:
> On Saturday 10 February 2007 00:13, jos poortvliet wrote:
> > Nobody has said anything about costs, indeed. Now afaik, swap prefetch is
> > designed to have no/as little as possible costs, so that makes sense.
> > Does it h
bout
the kernel community becoming harder to get involved with. As an outsider, it
sure seems so. I read frustrations everywhere. What about the kevent guy, his
blog: http://tservice.net.ru/~s0mbre/blog
I stumbled upon it when reading LWN. Seems pretty sad... I don't get the
technical stuff,
ency. This increases the cpu use
> possible under very heavy softirq traffic (such as network loads) and
> decreases the latency that might otherwise be seen (such as keyboard input
> under heavy cpu load on slow machines).
nice, con, nice! good to see you're back! how are things progr
25 matches
Mail list logo
