4 ms·
This makes very little sense. The author shows a fsync() benchmark comparing an actualy fsync (Pixel on ext4 without nobarrier) with a nobarrier (no-op fsync) a
by moonlander 10y ago
This makes very little sense. The author shows a fsync() benchmark comparing an actualy fsync (Pixel on ext4 without nobarrier) with a nobarrier (no-op fsync) alternative. The only thing this benchmark shows is that a no-op is faster than the real thing.
- idbehold 10y agoThe title of the article is "Why [the] Google Pixel lags 10x more than [the] Moto Z." The author showed that the Moto Z is using a no-op fsync while the Pixel is doing the real thing. I think the author appropriately explained and answered the title prompt.
- moonlander 10y agoBut the author fails to prove that fsync() is in any way the bottleneck for common I/O operations in everyday use of a smartphone.
- idbehold 10y agoWas that the hypothesis the author was trying to prove? Because I don't believe it was.
- monocasa 10y agoThe title is literally "Why [the] Google Pixel lags 10x more than [the] Moto Z". If he doesn't show that fsync(3) is the gating factor, then the fact that the Moto Z nops out fsync doesn't mean that much.
- cbsmith 10y agoSaying "no-op is faster than fsync" is just not as click-baity a title. There is a good question though... do you really need fsync on Android? If you don't, why are you calling it?