On Sat, Mar 09, 2019 at 01:49:18AM +0200, Ciprian Dorin Craciun wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 11:39 PM Ciprian Dorin Craciun
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 11:11 PM Jeffrey Altman wrote:
> > > The performance issues could be anywhere and everywhere between the
> > > application being used
On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 11:39 PM Ciprian Dorin Craciun
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 11:11 PM Jeffrey Altman wrote:
> > The performance issues could be anywhere and everywhere between the
> > application being used for testing and the disk backing the vice partition.
OK, so first of all I want
[Replying also to the list, just to mention the benchmarking technique.]
On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 11:11 PM Jeffrey Altman wrote:
> The performance issues could be anywhere and everywhere between the
> application being used for testing and the disk backing the vice partition.
The issue is not th
> On Mar 8, 2019, at 2:38 PM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 9:30 PM Mark Vitale wrote:
>> But now on more careful reading, I see this only applies when -dcache has
>> not been explicitly specified.
>> (Which, to be fair, is the normal case).
>
> Thanks for the i
On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 9:30 PM Mark Vitale wrote:
> But now on more careful reading, I see this only applies when -dcache has not
> been explicitly specified.
> (Which, to be fair, is the normal case).
Thanks for the insight.
> > (I'm struggling to get AFS to go over the 50MB/s, i.e. half a Gi
Ciprian,
> On Mar 8, 2019, at 2:15 PM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 9:11 PM Mark Vitale wrote:
>> The -dcache option for a disk-based cache does set the number of dcaches in
>> memory.
>> It has a minimum value of 2000 and max of 1.
>
>
> Is the 100K maximum
> On Mar 8, 2019, at 11:36 AM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 6:19 PM Ciprian Dorin Craciun
> wrote:
>> (B) Using `-files` and `-chunksize` so that their product is larger
>> than `-blocks` means that the cache can hold up to as many `-files`
>> actual AFS files,
On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 9:11 PM Mark Vitale wrote:
> The -dcache option for a disk-based cache does set the number of dcaches in
> memory.
> It has a minimum value of 2000 and max of 1.
Is the 100K maximum a hard limit imposed in code, or a
"best-practice"? (I've looked in a few places and
> On Mar 8, 2019, at 11:19 AM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun
> wrote:
>
> I have two small questions about the cache management of `asfd`. (The
> documentation isn't very explicit.)
>
> (In both cases I'm speaking about disk-based cache.)
>
> (A) Using `-dcache 128` with a `-chunksize 10` (i.e. 1M
I have two small questions about the cache management of `asfd`. (The
documentation isn't very explicit.)
(In both cases I'm speaking about disk-based cache.)
(A) Using `-dcache 128` with a `-chunksize 10` (i.e. 1MiB) for a
disk-based cache, would actually allocate 128 MiB from kernel memory
(i.
10 matches
Mail list logo
