On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 05:08:58PM +0200, Alex van den Bogaerdt wrote:
Hello everybody.
A very interesting thread indeed ;)

> On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 02:06:26PM +0000, larryjadams@comcast.net wrote:
> If you update ten times, you have ten times open, seek, read, write, close.
> If you update once and store ten rates, my gut feeling says it will be
> better. The data is mostly sequential so I guess you'd save 9 opens, 9 closes,
> and 9 seeks.
As far as I can see Alex is right.
_Each_ call to rrd_update (from the C-API) results in an open,lock,seek,write,close.

So I think if you somehow "cache" the updates and do _one_  call to rrd_update
with lots datasamples will generate less overhead on the disk/filesystem.

> No, I did not test this.  But you would probably do a better job at this
Neither did I ;)

So long,

Andreas.

P.S.: And of cause never update your databases at the same time.
It caused me lots of trouble (with ~2500 files containing ~5 RRAs)

-- 
Dipl.-Ing. Andreas Maus             science+computing ag
System Administration               Hagellocher Weg 73
mail: a.maus@science-computing.de   72070 Tuebingen, Germany
tel.: +49 7071 9457 456             www.science-computing.de

-- Binary/unsupported file stripped by Ecartis --
-- Err : No filename to use for decode, file stripped.
-- Type: application/pgp-signature


--
Unsubscribe mailto:rrd-developers-request@list.ee.ethz.ch?subject=unsubscribe
Help        mailto:rrd-developers-request@list.ee.ethz.ch?subject=help
Archive     http://lists.ee.ethz.ch/rrd-developers
WebAdmin    http://lists.ee.ethz.ch/lsg2.cgi