Re: fstat vs. lseek

On Monday, August 08, 2011 13:19:13 Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 1:10 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > There doesn't seem to have been any activity to inlude it in 3.1. The
> > merge window for 3.1 just ended. The next one will open for about a
> > week after the release.
> > Its also not yet included in linux-next which is a "preview" for the
> > currently worked on release + 1. A release takes roughly 3 months.
>
> OK. If it doesn't get into Linux 3.2 we had better start thinking
> hard about a workaround on our side.
If its ok I will write a mail to lkml referencing this thread and your numbers
inline (with attribution obviously).
I don't think it will be that hard to convince them. But I constantly surprise
myself with naivity so I may be wrong.

> > My largest machine I can reboot often enough to test such a thing has only
> > two sockets (4cores E5520). I guess you cannot reboot your loaned machine
> > with a new kernel easily?
>Not really. I do have root access to a 64-core box at the moment, and
>I could probably get permission to reboot it, but if it didn't come
>back on-line that would be awkward.
As I feared. Any chance that the person lending you the machine can give you a
hand?
Although I don't know how that could be after reading the code it would be
disappointing to wait for 3.2 with the llseek fixes appearing in $distribution
just to notice fstat is still faster for $unobvious_reason...

Andres