[erlang-questions] Obsolete exported functions file:raw_{read, write}_file_info/2 - why?

Zabrane Mickael zabrane3@REDACTED
Thu Sep 15 11:36:18 CEST 2011

Thanks  for sharing Joseph.

One more question:
Is the call prim_file:read_file/1 a better alternative to file:read_file/1?


On Sep 15, 2011, at 11:25 AM, Joseph Norton wrote:

> Hi.
> I'm working on a patch for the file.erl module itself.  In the meantime, see the attached module as a working example.  We have been using this approach for benchmarking purposes since early summer.  The performance difference is dramatically better than the default file implementation.
> thanks,
> Joseph Norton
> norton@REDACTED
> <basho_bench_erlang_file_alternative.erl>
> On Sep 15, 2011, at 1:57 AM, erlang wrote:
>>> I recommend reading the file.erl source.  It's quite instructive to see
>>> how many file I/O functions are redirected to the 'file_server_2'
>>> process.  For file I/O-intensive applications (e.g. Hibari and Riak I
>>> know, CouchDB and RabbitMQ I'd guess), having all calls to(*)
>>> file:read_file_info/1 serialized by the file server process is a source
>>> of latency that we (DB authors) may desire to live without.
>> How did you proceed to avoid these calls and reduce latency Scott?
>> Any hints?

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list