On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 05:08:58PM +0200, Alex van den Bogaerdt wrote: Hello everybody. A very interesting thread indeed ;)
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 02:06:26PM +0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > If you update ten times, you have ten times open, seek, read, write, close. > If you update once and store ten rates, my gut feeling says it will be > better. The data is mostly sequential so I guess you'd save 9 opens, 9 closes, > and 9 seeks. As far as I can see Alex is right. _Each_ call to rrd_update (from the C-API) results in an open,lock,seek,write,close. So I think if you somehow "cache" the updates and do _one_ call to rrd_update with lots datasamples will generate less overhead on the disk/filesystem. > No, I did not test this. But you would probably do a better job at this Neither did I ;) So long, Andreas. P.S.: And of cause never update your databases at the same time. It caused me lots of trouble (with ~2500 files containing ~5 RRAs) -- Dipl.-Ing. Andreas Maus science+computing ag System Administration Hagellocher Weg 73 mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 72070 Tuebingen, Germany tel.: +49 7071 9457 456 www.science-computing.de -- Binary/unsupported file stripped by Ecartis -- -- Err : No filename to use for decode, file stripped. -- Type: application/pgp-signature -- Unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Help mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archive http://lists.ee.ethz.ch/rrd-developers WebAdmin http://lists.ee.ethz.ch/lsg2.cgi
