Re: WAPBL patch for testing

[Havard Eidnes <he%uninett.no@localhost>]

> On Sat, Nov 01, 2008 at 02:19:54AM +0100, Havard Eidnes wrote:
> > The wallcklock difference is quite a lot smaller than previously,
> > but the number of I/Os is still many times larger in the first
> > case, even if you add the two.
>
> There is still an open question of how aggressive the flushing works,
> which needs to be revisited later. It will likely explain the issues
> with the additional IO.

BTW, both the two latest runs were done with SimonB's patch and

vfs.wapbl.flush_disk_cache = 0

Regards,

- Håvard