From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 45293 invoked by alias); 25 Feb 2020 11:32:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact elfutils-devel-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: Sender: elfutils-devel-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 45282 invoked by uid 89); 25 Feb 2020 11:32:06 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Checked: by ClamAV 0.100.3 on sourceware.org X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-6.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy= X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on sourceware.org X-Spam-Level: X-HELO: gnu.wildebeest.org Received: from wildebeest.demon.nl (HELO gnu.wildebeest.org) (212.238.236.112) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 11:32:05 +0000 Received: from tarox.wildebeest.org (tarox.wildebeest.org [172.31.17.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gnu.wildebeest.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D8C9530008A8; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 12:32:02 +0100 (CET) Received: by tarox.wildebeest.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 89A184B70B61; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 12:32:02 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Subject: Re: patch to commit soon: PR25375 debuginfod prefetching From: Mark Wielaard To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" , elfutils-devel@sourceware.org Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 11:32:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20200224222946.GC26763@redhat.com> References: <20200224222946.GC26763@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-5.el7) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Flag: NO X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2020-q1/txt/msg00134.txt Hi Frank, On Mon, 2020-02-24 at 17:29 -0500, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > This patch has been baking on my public servers awhile and can make a > huge difference in performance. It's not something immediately > obvious how or whether to test, as it's a pure performance improvement. > Planning to push shortly. As far as I understand it, it looks good. One tiny question: > @@ -2809,7 +2857,8 @@ main (int argc, char *argv[]) > fdcache_mbs =3D 1024; // 1 gigabyte > else > fdcache_mbs =3D sfs.f_bavail * sfs.f_bsize / 1024 / 1024 / 4; // 25%= of free space > - fdcache_fds =3D concurrency * 2; > + fdcache_prefetch =3D 64; // guesstimate storage is this much less cost= ly than re-decompression > + fdcache_fds =3D (concurrency + fdcache_prefetch) * 2; Here fdcache_prefetch is set and used before argp_parse () is called, which would set it to the user supplied value (if any). Is that intentional? Cheers, Mark