Re: dentry bloat.
From: Dipankar Sarma (dipankar_at_in.ibm.com)
Date: 05/14/04
- Previous message: Jens Axboe: "Re: dentry bloat."
- In reply to: Paul Jackson: "Re: dentry bloat."
- Next in thread: Dipankar Sarma: "Re: dentry bloat."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 16:54:08 +0530 To: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 04:14:33AM -0700, Paul Jackson wrote:
> > so I guess you do.
>
> Sorry - I'm being thick.
>
> Is the new hashing good or bad?
That I don't know from the contradicting descriptions, but...
> (Usually, performance is thought of as something 'good', so when you say
> it is 'brought down', that sounds 'bad', but since it's ms/iteration,
> I'm guessing that you mean to say that the ms/iteration is lower, which
> would I guess improves performance, so I'm guessing that bringing
> performance down is 'good' in this case, which is not idiomatic to the
> particular version of English I happen to speak ... So please favor
In this case, the performance is inversely proportional to the
benchmark metric. Lower benchmark metric means better performance.
Thanks
Dipankar
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Previous message: Jens Axboe: "Re: dentry bloat."
- In reply to: Paul Jackson: "Re: dentry bloat."
- Next in thread: Dipankar Sarma: "Re: dentry bloat."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
