On Tue, 31 Mar 2015 23:12:04 +0100, Vincent Sanders wrote:
> In an attempt to address this I have recently reworked the handling of
> small files within the cache. There are now a small number of
> relatively large files into which all small objects are placed. This
> has resulted in the majority of objects (>70%) being held in these blocks
> rather than in separate files on disk.
>
> The resulting cache directories have a correspondingly smaller number
> of files and directories within them and should (I hope) exhibit
> greatly superior performance.
There's something not quite right, as I'm not getting the "m"
directory or any contents created, resulting in things like this:
(4.286992) content/fs_backing_store.c get_store_entry 844: url:http://www.google.co.uk/images/icons/product/chrome-48.png
(4.287125) content/fs_backing_store.c fetch 1845: retriving cache data for url:http://www.google.co.uk/images/icons/product/chrome-48.png
(4.287197) content/fs_backing_store.c fetch 1870: Created new heap allocation 0x55ff93a0
(4.287266) content/fs_backing_store.c store_open 1058: opening PROGDIR:Users/chris/Cache/m/O/Y/6/BW/Y/OQZTNMA
(4.287462) content/fs_backing_store.c store_read_file 1786: Open failed
(4.287533) content/fs_backing_store.c entry_release_alloc 1713: freeing 0x55ff93a0
I have "d" and things in "d".
pread/pwrite() do not seem to be working here either, they just return
-1?
(4.303433) content/fs_backing_store.c fetch 1870: Created new heap allocation 0x53a517c8
(4.303736) content/fs_backing_store.c store_open 1058: opening PROGDIR:Users/chris/Cache/mblk/A
(4.304096) content/fs_backing_store.c store_read_block 1757: Read -1 of 506 bytes into 0x53a517c8 from 0x19000 block 100
(4.304178) content/fs_backing_store.c entry_release_alloc 1713: freeing 0x53a517c8
(10.389859) content/fs_backing_store.c store_open 1058: opening PROGDIR:Users/chris/Cache/dblk/A
(10.390208) content/fs_backing_store.c store_write_block 1609: Wrote -1 of 5430 bytes from 0x534893f8 at 0x252000 block 297
I have those two files but they are both 0 bytes.
Any ideas?
Chris
No comments:
Post a Comment