Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

remove fdatasync() discard, we write with O_SYNC #20168

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 26, 2024

Conversation

harshavardhana
Copy link
Member

Community Contribution License

All community contributions in this pull request are licensed to the project maintainers
under the terms of the Apache 2 license.
By creating this pull request I represent that I have the right to license the
contributions to the project maintainers under the Apache 2 license.

Description

remove fdatasync() discard, we write with O_SYNC

Motivation and Context

fdatasync() discard for page-cached READs is not
needed, it would seem like this can cause latencies
in situations when things are resource-starved.

How to test this PR?

Avoid extra syscalls during DELETEs if we can.

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Optimization (provides speedup with no functional changes)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist:

  • Fixes a regression (If yes, please add commit-id or PR # here)
  • Unit tests added/updated
  • Internal documentation updated
  • Create a documentation update request here

fdatasync() discard for page-cached READs is not
needed, it would seem like this can cause latencies
in situations when things are loaded.
@harshavardhana harshavardhana merged commit a16193b into minio:master Jul 26, 2024
20 checks passed
@harshavardhana harshavardhana deleted the remove-fdatasync branch July 26, 2024 17:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants