On 21.07.2011 07:44, Arne Jansen wrote: > On 20.07.2011 19:21, Chris Mason wrote: >> Excerpts from Chris Mason's message of 2011-07-19 13:30:22 -0400: >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> I've pushed out a new integration-test branch, and it includes a new >>> reader/writer locking scheme for the btree locks. >>> >>> We've seen a number of benchmarks dominated by contention on the root >>> node lock. This changes our locks into a simple reader/writer lock. >>> They are based on mutexes so that we still take advantage of the mutex >>> adaptive spins for write locks (rwsemaphores were much slower). >>> >>> I'm also sending the individual commits, please do take a look. >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> I just rebased Josef's enospc fixes into integration-test, it should fix >> the warnings in extent-tree.c >> > > With the current integration-test branch I get very early enospc on > a 7G volume create with -m single -d single and > > fs_mark-3.3/fs_mark -d /mnt/fsm -D 512 -t 16 -n 4096 -s 51200 -L5 -S0 -R1 > > It enospces at about 20%, but I can continue to fill it up to 94%. I tried to bisect this, but it turned out to be hard. Sooner or later I get this early enospc on every revision, on some sooner, on others later. At least the current for-linus branch is much worse than integration-test. > > -Arne > -- -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
