Re: The fsync issue
On Sat, 2010-11-27 at 15:01:15 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-11-27 at 07:59 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 13:31:20 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > Just got this from Christoph Helwig:
> > >
> > > 13:23 < hch> bwh: if you guys are interested in helping dpkg review and ack the
> > > per-fs sync ioctl path that sage weil sent out a couple of weeks
> > > ago
> > > 13:24 < hch> bwh: and report the ext4 fsync issues to the list, I know ext4
> > > fsync isn't stellar, but the numbers sounds so bad that there must
> > > be a bug somewhere
> > > The patch referred to is in
> > > <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.file-systems/44628>.
> > Unfortunately that patch does not seem much appealing, it's Linux only,
> > not even in mainline, and it would need for dpkg to track on which file
> > system each file is located and issue such ioctl once per file system.
> You don't need to tell me this.
Well, you posted what seemed a proposal for a possible solution (even if
forwarded from someone else), and I gave the reasons why I'd rather not
use it. It was not meant as and insult or implying you don't know those
things. I'd think that was better than just a "No" or no reply? (But then
maybe I'm just misreading your reply?)
> Please talk to upstream about the bad fsync() performance.
Upstream was notified already about that some time ago