Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New readfile() System Call Under Review For Reading Small~Medium Files Faster

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by ssokolow View Post
    It's getting more popular to compile code to ABIs
    it's api, not abi. there are two reasons: it's faster and it avoids toctou

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by atomsymbol View Post
      Is there a real-world scenario in which open/read/close of sysfs and procfs files is a bottleneck?
      /bin/top

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by atomsymbol View Post
        Question: If it wasn't an issue not to have the readfile() Linux syscall on 386/486 CPUs in the 90-ties
        it was
        Originally posted by atomsymbol View Post
        Just a note: SATA and NVMe have very similar random 4K read IOPS at queue depth 1 (about 10000 IOPS) because it (presumably) is limited by the technology and not limited by SATA speeds.
        my nvme drive is about 8 times faster. and it's not even dram-based. sata has inherent overhead including cpu overhead. and you can run more than 1 app at a time, if you run 32 apps in parallel, you'll get qd32 for free
        Originally posted by atomsymbol View Post
        Just a 2nd note: Many people are archiving data and storing videos on HDDs, not SSDs, because of capacity and because of cost per terabyte.
        such usecases will not benefit from subj

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by atomsymbol View Post
          I hope you do realize that there exist far better [research] methods of how to increase performance of kernel-userspace transitions, by a factor of 10 at least compared to what Linux is currently doing.
          i hope you do realize that using some imaginary os instead of real linux is out of question

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by pal666 View Post
            /bin/top
            It has less than 0.5% CPU utilization on my machine with 183 tasks, 218 kernel threads and 1538 total threads. htop: 1.3%.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by pal666 View Post
              i hope you do realize that using some imaginary os instead of real linux is out of question
              I meant extending Linux, not extending some other "imaginary" OS. If you don't know how to achieve the performance target I mentioned, that's not my problem.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by atomsymbol View Post

                NaCl.
                Enlighten me again and this time with links and research to back your claims up.
                I call your claim bullshit unless proven wrong.

                Your credibility with me is declining super fast now.
                If i search for NaCl all i find is "Google Native Client" which has absolutely nothing to do with this conversation.

                So bring proof or just don't post. As this is getting tiresome.

                Note, there actually is one system that could get up to 10x the performance. That's the playstation 5, but that again has nothing to do with this. I was asking for linux and now. Not hypothetical or other platforms.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by pal666 View Post
                  it's api, not abi. there are two reasons: it's faster and it avoids toctou
                  I meant what I said. I was referring to how, if you were to hack together some machine code by hand, the execution environment still wouldn't allow you to make calls outside the set described by the API and, in idealized form, would lack the "vocabulary" to describe such calls.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by markg85 View Post
                    Enlighten me again and this time with links and research to back your claims up.
                    I call your claim bullshit unless proven wrong.

                    Your credibility with me is declining super fast now.
                    If i search for NaCl all i find is "Google Native Client" which has absolutely nothing to do with this conversation.
                    NaCl is part of a research area. A person can choose to read articles from that research area or choose not to read them. Dismissing a whole research area based on literally just a couple of sentences from a web search engine isn't a good strategy.

                    If you are familiar with the research area to which NaCl belongs then please reply with an argument why you believe that the core idea behind NaCl cannot be used to achieve the speedup I am claiming can be achieved.

                    Originally posted by markg85 View Post
                    So bring proof or just don't post. As this is getting tiresome.

                    Note, there actually is one system that could get up to 10x the performance. That's the playstation 5, but that again has nothing to do with this. I was asking for linux and now. Not hypothetical or other platforms.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by atomsymbol View Post

                      NaCl is part of a research area. A person can choose to read articles from that research area or choose not to read them. Dismissing a whole research area based on literally just a couple of sentences from a web search engine isn't a good strategy.

                      If you are familiar with the research area to which NaCl belongs then please reply with an argument why you believe that the core idea behind NaCl cannot be used to achieve the speedup I am claiming can be achieved.


                      You claim something has a 10x improvement.
                      You expect me to read all there is about NaCl without giving me a single hint as to where i'm even supposed to look.

                      No deal!

                      I am dismissing NaCl as i'm not going to read up hundreds of articles and long videos to "verify your claim". I'm not here for that.
                      Till you prove your point with numbers and articles to back it up, i'm going to downright call your claims total bullshit.

                      It would be theoretically impossible to get a 10x improvement on the low level file reading where the hardware remains as is and just one part of the software stack changes. It "would" be possible to make that claim in end user libraries where there are loads of indirections in between all making it a bit slower. But at the low level: bullshit. Just remember, again, that even io_uring isn't improving performance much. Only by a small margin, say 30 percent max. Very far from 10x, more like 0.3x. The benefit, yet again, is in the async nature.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X