[Raw Msg Headers][Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
ZMailer's scheduler and Linux's INOTIFY?
- To: zmailer@nic.funet.fi
- Subject: ZMailer's scheduler and Linux's INOTIFY?
- From: "Dawid Kuroczko" <qnex42@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 11:53:17 +0200
- DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=rcGYUdy+2hIrKDkSHfyDuoOWKcU9KAJx7eQd5J3hs6MRT33IwSps20WfTqL2aUkxPHdprat3k4p2CQPGcgQsbscJqw/1oeHeswnG4bThzkTyrzgqmtozrtIc+uRPMz4FYAHBAkNjXXHcuA3/1lYcXZD4foOXDmLjpih4zRle18A=
- Original-Recipient: rfc822;zmailer-log@nic.funet.fi
- Sender: zmailer-owner@nic.funet.fi
Hello!
I've been thinking about a nice new feature of Linux 2.6.x, that
is the INOTIFY interface. Scheduler's job is to periodicaly scan
whole a lot of directories (2^26+1 assuming SCHEDULERDIRHASH=2).
The idea of INOTIFY is that instead of checking directories
(or files) for changes periodically, one may inform the kernel
about inodes its interested in (in scheduler's case, these would
be queue subdirectories), and from time to time request
a list of changes in these directories seen by the kernel.
This saves a lot of readdirs, and may improve scheduler's
scalability on heavily loaded (io-bound) systems.
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8478
Is it a thing worth pursuing? How do you think? Or maybe even
someone has researched the problem already?
Regards,
Dawid
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe zmailer" in
the body of a message to majordomo@nic.funet.fi