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

Need to support more efficient cacheing #49

Open
fisherab opened this issue Apr 6, 2016 · 1 comment
Open

Need to support more efficient cacheing #49

fisherab opened this issue Apr 6, 2016 · 1 comment
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request performance Issues related to poor performance of the program

Comments

@fisherab
Copy link
Contributor

fisherab commented Apr 6, 2016

Currently with two level storage writing to the archive is performed as quickly as possible. In the case of archiving by dataset if datafiles are added to a dataset over a period of time then many different copies of the dataset will be written out which is not good for tape storage. I propose to add another option to delay writing to archive until such time as the disk space is needed. The benefit for archiving by datafile rather than be dataset will be much less and only means that if a datafile is created and then deleted before it is written to archive then no time/space is wasted doing the write to archive. With writing as late as possible the disk cache must be trusted not to lose data (RAID or frequent backups or ...)

@fisherab fisherab self-assigned this Apr 6, 2016
@fisherab fisherab added the enhancement New feature or request label Apr 6, 2016
@RKrahl
Copy link
Member

RKrahl commented Jan 3, 2018

With writing as late as possible the disk cache must be trusted not to lose data (RAID or frequent backups or ...)

That is the drawback that I see with this approach. At the moment, one does not need a backup for main storage at all, the archive storage is the backup. If one needs to introduce backup for the main storage, all possible benefit of this approach is gone: the cost for the backup will be at least as much as the current quick write to archive.

@RKrahl RKrahl added the performance Issues related to poor performance of the program label Mar 15, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request performance Issues related to poor performance of the program
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants