From: "George Spelvin" <linux@horizon.com>
To: tmac@hp.com
Cc: adilger@dilger.ca, andi@firstfloor.org, linux@horizon.com,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] ext4: increase mbcache scalability
Date: 28 Jan 2014 07:26:23 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140128122623.26029.qmail@science.horizon.com> (raw)
> The third part of the patch further increases the scalablity of an ext4
> filesystem by having each ext4 fielsystem allocate and use its own private
> mbcache structure, instead of sharing a single mcache structures across all
> ext4 filesystems, and increases the size of its mbcache hash tables.
Are you sure this helps? The idea behind having one large mbcache is
that one large hash table will always be at least as well balanced as
multiple separate tables, if the total size is the same.
If you have two size 2^n hash tables, the chance of collision is equal to
one size 2^(n+1) table if they're equally busy, and if they're unequally
busy. the latter is better. The busier file system will take less time
per search, and since it's searcehed more often than the less-busy one,
net win.
How does it compare with just increasing the hash table size but leaving
them combined?
next reply other threads:[~2014-01-28 12:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-28 12:26 George Spelvin [this message]
2014-01-28 21:09 ` Andreas Dilger
2014-01-28 20:07 ` Thavatchai Makphaibulchoke
2014-02-11 18:47 ` Thavatchai Makphaibulchoke
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-08-22 15:54 [PATCH v2 0/2] " T Makphaibulchoke
2014-01-24 18:31 ` [PATCH v4 0/3] " T Makphaibulchoke
2014-01-24 21:38 ` Andi Kleen
2014-01-25 1:13 ` Thavatchai Makphaibulchoke
2014-01-25 6:09 ` Andreas Dilger
2014-01-27 12:27 ` Thavatchai Makphaibulchoke
2014-02-09 19:46 ` Thavatchai Makphaibulchoke
2014-02-11 19:58 ` Thavatchai Makphaibulchoke
2014-02-13 2:01 ` Andreas Dilger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140128122623.26029.qmail@science.horizon.com \
--to=linux@horizon.com \
--cc=adilger@dilger.ca \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tmac@hp.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome