| |||||||||||||
What's the optimization?What's the optimization?Posted Mar 14, 2009 7:21 UTC (Sat) by dfsmith (guest, #20302)Parent article: Ts'o: Delayed allocation and the zero-length file problem
Can someone explain to me (briefly) what optimization ext4 is exploiting by avoiding writing data "soon"?
I.e., what is the pathological situation where a background fsync() initiated on close() fails?
I fully appreciate delayed allocation on files that are still open though.
(Log in to post comments)
Temporary files. Posted Mar 14, 2009 11:21 UTC (Sat) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] A lot of files are written, used and removed in short order (think about "configure" script, for example). If allocation is delayed then file never hits the disk and savings can be huge.
Temporary files. Posted Mar 14, 2009 12:47 UTC (Sat) by mgb (guest, #3226) [Link]
Sounds like ext4 might be a good choice for /tmp.
Temporary files. Posted Mar 16, 2009 3:24 UTC (Mon) by k8to (subscriber, #15413) [Link]
All Linux filesystems are good choices for tmp.
This allows linux to avoid the idiocy of solaris's tmpfs where writing a large file to /tmp can crash the box.
Temporary files. Posted Mar 16, 2009 15:22 UTC (Mon) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
Alternatively you could use... tmpfs! Writing a large file to /tmp isn't
going to crash the box unless you explicitly raised the size limits on /tmp...
|
|||||||||||||