On Fri, May 04 2018, Dilger, Andreas wrote:
> On May 3, 2018, at 07:50, David Laight wrote:
>>
>> From: James Simmons
>>> Sent: 02 May 2018 19:22
>>> From: Li Xi
>>>
>>> Most of the time, keys are never changed. So rwlock might be
>>> better for the concurrency of key read.
>>
>> OTOH unless
On May 3, 2018, at 07:50, David Laight wrote:
>
> From: James Simmons
>> Sent: 02 May 2018 19:22
>> From: Li Xi
>>
>> Most of the time, keys are never changed. So rwlock might be
>> better for the concurrency of key read.
>
> OTOH unless there is contention on the spin lock during reads the
>
On Thu, May 03 2018, David Laight wrote:
> From: James Simmons
>> Sent: 02 May 2018 19:22
>> From: Li Xi
>>
>> Most of the time, keys are never changed. So rwlock might be
>> better for the concurrency of key read.
>
> OTOH unless there is contention on the spin lock during reads the
> additiona
From: James Simmons
> Sent: 02 May 2018 19:22
> From: Li Xi
>
> Most of the time, keys are never changed. So rwlock might be
> better for the concurrency of key read.
OTOH unless there is contention on the spin lock during reads the
additional cost of a rwlock (probably double that of a spinlock
From: Li Xi
Most of the time, keys are never changed. So rwlock might be
better for the concurrency of key read.
Signed-off-by: Li Xi
Signed-off-by: Gu Zheng
Intel-bug-id: https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/browse/LU-6800
Reviewed-on: http://review.whamcloud.com/15558
Reviewed-by: Faccini Bruno
Revi
