Re: [Pan-users] Re: Forcing an expire?

[Ron Johnson]

On 2009-07-09 21:28, Duncan wrote:
> Ron Johnson <address@hidden> posted
> address@hidden, excerpted below, on  Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:48:18
> -0500:
>
> > After reading this:
> >    http://www.westnet.com/~gsmith/content/linux-pdflush.htm
> >
> > and especially this thread:
> > http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/1/7/303
> >
> > I boosted dirty_ratio from 10 to 30 and dirty_background_ratio from 5 to
> > 10.
> >
> > Now tasks.nzb.tmp seems to get written 3x faster.
> >
> > Thanks!!!
>
> Cool! =:^)

The problem now is that the nntp pipes are so fat that, "because" of 
multi-threading, the tasks.nzb.tmp flush starts again only 3-5 
seconds after the previous flush completed.

This is why I was pushing for on-disk structures instead of having 
to flush memory structures to disk.

If SQLite is bad, then maybe Berkeley DB.  It's got rollbacks, fine 
grained locking.  KLibido, a KDE newsreader, uses it for a similar 
purpose.

*Something* so that a 10KB change in tasks does not require a 300MB 
file to be written to disk.

> BTW, I don't know what kernel you are on, but on the leading edge, 

A home-rolled 2.6.28.

> uncovered and stop-gap fixed in kernel 2.6.29, fixed more correctly in 
> 2.6.30, and possibly settle-in fixes to in-development 2.6.31 (I'm not 

I'll have to upgrade soon.

> sure on that), there have been a number of some would say way too late 
> changes to the way ext3 handles such things.  This was in large part 
> rooted in a MAJOR kerflukle with ext4 development, that uncovered a 
> number of badly chosen defaults and policy decisions and implementations 
> in existing ext3 and the under development ext4.

I lost a WHOLE LOT of downloads from an ext4-over-lvm2 mishap.  Must 
have been an unclean (or non-existent) umount on shutdown.

--
Scooty Puff, Sr
The Doom-Bringer