From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6145C77D66 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 10:12:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 548851860D for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 10:12:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id EE712185FF for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 10:12:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id BF21D4646A for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 10:12:43 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 10:12:38 +0200 (CEST) From: Dietmar Maurer To: Stefan Reiter , Proxmox Backup Server development discussion Message-ID: <972660584.1540.1619683958628@webmail.proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.10.5-Rev9 X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.368 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup 2/3] RemoteChunkReader: add LRU cached variant X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 08:12:44 -0000 > Again, performance testing is hard with this (I'll take a closer look at > why as well), but in terms of hit rate the "hinted" cache is at about > 1-2% - we could probably reduce it's size. > > Removing it entirely would probably not be good, as I think we use it to > cache the zero-chunk as well IIRC? Yes, you are right.