From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 11:30:48 -0400
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Message-ID: <47a57ff1c3af247ca76f0769f54c216b@mikro.quanstro.net>
In-Reply-To: <955c674d73ea16246b232065c9c6dd77@quintile.net>
References: <955c674d73ea16246b232065c9c6dd77@quintile.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] duppage
Topicbox-Message-UUID: f96a2248-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Tue Jun 10 09:58:18 EDT 2014, steve@quintile.net wrote:
> > if a process exits and is then run again, it will always be re-read
> > from storage.  (since channel comparisons factor in to finding
> > an image.)  only if the lifetime overlaps will the cached image be
> > used.
>
> The one place where  I can imagine lots of cache hits is when running
> parallel mk jobs, it would be interesting to measure and see how much
> of a win it is.

1.6MB of 6c read vs the theoretical 25MB, according to my measurements.

- erik