<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.7" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Day 30 of 60: What are the single queue directory bottlenecks? (pt 2)</title>
	<link>http://jc.ngo.org.uk/blog/2006/08/08/day-30-of-60-what-are-the-single-queue-directory-bottlenecks-pt-2/</link>
	<description>It'll all be over in 60 days</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 02:07:37 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Bernd Eckenfels</title>
		<link>http://jc.ngo.org.uk/blog/2006/08/08/day-30-of-60-what-are-the-single-queue-directory-bottlenecks-pt-2/#comment-103862</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 23:54:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://jc.ngo.org.uk/blog/2006/08/08/day-30-of-60-what-are-the-single-queue-directory-bottlenecks-pt-2/#comment-103862</guid>
					<description>Did you actually get any results on the fdsync() strangeness?

But anyway: creat series of posts (just stumbled over it while checking some backgrounds on fdsync() performance).

Greetings
Bernd</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Did you actually get any results on the fdsync() strangeness?</p>
<p>But anyway: creat series of posts (just stumbled over it while checking some backgrounds on fdsync() performance).</p>
<p>Greetings<br />
Bernd
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
