Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of Ticket #1189, comment 3
- Timestamp:
- 2010-08-28T22:55:16Z (14 years ago)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
- Modified
-
Ticket #1189, comment 3
initial v1 1 1 Thanks bj0. 2 2 3 {{{big_writes}}} should only affect writes, and I can't immediately see why it would have anything but a beneficial effect. {{{direct_io}}} might affect both reads and writes, and could cause some loss of performance for applications that are relying for performanceon kernel caching. Can you try the same tests with {{{-o big_writes}}} only?3 {{{big_writes}}} should only affect writes, and I can't immediately see why it would have anything but a beneficial effect. {{{direct_io}}} might affect both reads and writes, and could cause some loss of performance for applications whose performance depends on kernel caching. Can you try the same tests with {{{-o big_writes}}} only? 4 4 5 [I initially suggested both because http://xtreemfs.blogspot.com/2008/08/fuse-performance.html said that {{{direct_io}}} was needed (at least for some version of sshfsand Linux tested in 2008) to support writing in blocks greater than 4 KiB. However, point 2 in http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.fuse.devel/5292 suggests that this restriction might have been lifted.]5 [I initially suggested both because http://xtreemfs.blogspot.com/2008/08/fuse-performance.html said that {{{direct_io}}} was needed (at least for some version of ~~sshfs~~ FUSE and Linux tested in 2008) to support writing in blocks greater than 4 KiB. However, point 2 in http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.fuse.devel/5292 suggests that this restriction might have been lifted.] 6 6 7 7 What Linux kernel version and sshfs version did you use?
