Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #30887

Re: Multithreaded disk access

From Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com>
Newsgroups comp.arch.embedded
Subject Re: Multithreaded disk access
Date 2021-10-31 21:55 +0200
Organization TGI
Message-ID <slmsbf$v3v$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (4 earlier) <skk2fr$ooe$1@dont-email.me> <skk753$tmp$1@dont-email.me> <skkmg9$hl3$1@dont-email.me> <skkpv8$8cc$1@dont-email.me> <slmqba$b12$2@z-news.wcss.wroc.pl>

Show all headers | View raw


On 10/31/2021 21:21, antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl wrote:
> Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> wrote:
>>
>> Now this is where the worst fit allocation strategy becomes the game
>> changer. A newly created file is almost certainly contiguously
>> allocated; fragmentation occurs when it is appended to (and the
>> space past its last block has been already allocated in the meantime).
>> I think I saw somewhere (never really got interested) that mainstream
>> operating systems of today do just first fit - which means once you
>> delete a file, no matter how small, its space will be allocated as
>> part of the next request etc., no idea why they do it (if they do so,
>> my memory on that is not very certain) in such a primitive manner
>> but here they are.
> 
> There was some research and first fit turned out to be pretty good.
> But it is implemented slightly differently: there is moving pointer,
> search advances it.  So, after deallocation you wait till moving
> pointer arrives to the hole.  Way better than immediately filling
> hole: there is reasonable chance that holes will coalece into
> bigger free area.  Another point is that you refuse allocation
> when disc is too full (say at 95% utilization).  The two things
> together mean that normally fragmentation is not a problem.
> 

This might be somewhat better than plain first fit but it can be no
match to worst fit. They probably don't do worst fit because they
must have huge amounts of memory to dig through due to poor
filesystem design (they have to go through 32 bits or more for
each cluster).
In DPS the CAT is one bit per cluster which makes worst fit doable
without any problems like that. I have enhanced it a little
(many years ago) noticing that the partition could come to a
point where it has two almost equally sized empty parts; now you append
to a file, it gets some clusters from one of these; next time you
append to it the *other* one is the largest and it takes from it... :).
So now dps first checks if there are empty clusters to allocate
in succession of these already allocated to the file, if none
then it does worst fit.

Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Multithreaded disk access Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-10-15 07:08 -0700
  Re: Multithreaded disk access Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-10-15 11:38 -0400
    Re: Multithreaded disk access Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-10-15 09:00 -0700
      Re: Multithreaded disk access Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-10-15 12:48 -0400
        Re: Multithreaded disk access Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-10-15 11:40 -0700
  Re: Multithreaded disk access Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2021-10-15 18:46 +0300
    Re: Multithreaded disk access Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-10-15 09:19 -0700
      Re: Multithreaded disk access Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2021-10-15 19:28 +0300
  Re: Multithreaded disk access Brett <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2021-10-17 20:27 +0000
    Re: Multithreaded disk access Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-10-17 14:49 -0700
      Re: Multithreaded disk access Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-10-17 15:01 -0700
      Re: Multithreaded disk access Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2021-10-18 01:09 +0300
        Re: Multithreaded disk access Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-10-18 08:05 -0700
          Re: Multithreaded disk access Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2021-10-18 19:25 +0300
            Re: Multithreaded disk access Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-10-18 13:46 -0700
              Re: Multithreaded disk access Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2021-10-19 00:46 +0300
                Re: Multithreaded disk access Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-10-18 16:17 -0700
                Re: Multithreaded disk access antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2021-10-31 19:21 +0000
                Re: Multithreaded disk access Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2021-10-31 21:55 +0200
              Re: Multithreaded disk access Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-10-25 04:19 -0700
                Re: Multithreaded disk access Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-10-25 20:23 -0400
                Re: Multithreaded disk access Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2021-10-25 22:29 -0700
      Re: Multithreaded disk access Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2021-10-18 11:58 +1100

csiph-web