From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc-Christian Petersen Subject: Re: Horrible ftruncate performance Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 17:34:12 +0200 Message-ID: <200307111730.50601.m.c.p@gmx.net> References: <20030710052931.GA17957@namesys.com> <200307111716.56823.Dieter.Nuetzel@hamburg.de> <20030711152431.GF17180@namesys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <20030711152431.GF17180@namesys.com> Content-Disposition: inline List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Oleg Drokin , Dieter N?tzel Cc: Szakacsits Szabolcs , reiserfs-list@namesys.com, Chris Mason On Friday 11 July 2003 17:24, Oleg Drokin wrote: Hi Oleg, > Actually I did it already, as data-logging patches can be applied to > 2.4.22-pre3 (where this truncate patch was included). > > Maybe it _IS_ time for this _AND_ all the other data-logging patches? > > 2.4.22-pre5? > It's Chris turn. I thought it is good idea to test in -ac first, though > (even taking into account that these patches are part of SuSE's stock > kernels). Well, I don't think that testing in -ac is necessary at all in this case. Hundred (maybe even thousands) of users are using data-logging stuff, SuSE has it since years, WOLK has it since years. At least for WOLK I know that there isn't at least one problem with data-logging stuff (there might be but not hit yet ;) and there are also tons of wolk+reiserfs-data-logging users and I can be sure 100%, if there were a problem, my inbox would tell me so ;) I am using WOLK on many production machines with ReiserFS mostly as Fileserver (hundred of gigabytes) and proxy caches. If someone would ask me: Go for 2.4 mainline inclusion w/o going via -ac! :) -- ciao, Marc