Robert Watson wrote: > Changing > locking primitives, as I mentioned in an earlier post, is a risky thing: > after all, it intentionally changes the timing for critical kernel data > structures in the file system code. I've given Stephan, the author of > the patch, a ping to ask him about this, but late in a release cycle, > conservativism is the watch-word.
Agreed, but it would be a shame to miss on the momentum 7.0 has acquired for performance. Web servers are so common that there's a huge chance one of the first thing people will do with 7.0 would be some kind of web-benchmarks, especially after this thread on [EMAIL PROTECTED] Though (as I read the thread) the patch won't bring FreeBSD in line with Linux, it will help it not to be so slow it's silly. Re: timings: Would looking at past instances give insight into future? I don't remember the time accurately, but in the past, when VFS was translated to MPSAFE and the locking reengineered, were there such problems? Maybe Peter Holm can run a week or so of constant stress testing (24-hours-a-day) with the patch to verify it at least in short term?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
