[lkml]   [1999]   [Mar]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [OFFTOPIC] Re: disk head scheduling
    > On 22 Mar 1999, David Wragg wrote:
    >> Why SRAM? The nice thing about SRAM is its low latencies. If you're
    >> slurping a whole track off a disk, latencies shouldn't be an issue;
    >> you might need lots of bandwidth, but you can get high bandwidth from
    >> DRAM.
    > Because dynamic RAM needs refresh. Refresh takes power. You need
    > to keep the data without power, i.e., the bias from a small battery
    > that is essentially shelf-life.
    What are you talking about? Seriously! What drives have batteries on
    them to keep their RAM alive? This is a joke right? I haven't seen any
    drives that count on the persistence of the RAM to maintain data integrity
    (this doesn't mean they don't - just unlikely that they'd be mass market
    stuff). Remember there is a lot of stored energy in those spinning discs.
    If a drive vendor really wanted to maintain data integrity, they'd use the
    spinning inertia of the platters to reverse power the motor to allow a
    write in progress to complete before loosing power. All the drives
    indicate is that any command they mark as complete is (ie data on the
    disk). Anything else is up to the file system.

    TTFN - Guy

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:50    [W:0.021 / U:7.832 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site