On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 08:43:17AM -0700, Brian Somers wrote: > On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 05:45:01 -0400 > Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 11:42:36PM -0700, Brian Somers wrote: > > > [-developers elided] > > > > > > Interesting... I use nullfs as part of our build system here. > > > I found that it's performance is appalling when pushed a > > > little (running two builds on one machine, each with two > > > nullfs mounts, two devfs and two procfs mounts gives a build > > > time of 4.5 hours whereas a single build will finish in 1.5 > > > hours). I've seen >6 hour builds on a loaded box - only > > > attributable to nullfs. > > > > What version? > > The version that ships with 6.1.
OK, that's unusual and bears further investigation then. When I measured it I did not see this kind of dramatic performance loss (anecdotally it doesn't fit with my own experiences either: I also use it for parallel compilations, and I do not see anomalously low performance compared to machines not using nullfs). The only thing I can think of is that the underlying filesystem is not mpsafe (e.g. are you using UFS quotas?), in which case it's not really nullfs to blame. Hmm, are you sure it's 6.1-RELEASE and not a prerelease? I think the code that was supposed to make the nullfs mount mpsafe conditional on the mpsafety of the lower layer was broken until some time during the release cycle, but it was fixed before the release. Kris
pgpznLc2rsOVC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
