Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 01 Apr 2003 08:58:32 +1000 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: Delaying writes to disk when there's no need |
| |
John Bradford wrote:
>>If the memory does get written to again before the writeout timeout >>then yeah its used some cpu, memory, pci, etc that it didn't have >>to. >> > >It will presumably also have filled the cache with the writeout data. > What cache?
> > >>>Ultimately its all a tradeoff. Do you write now, or do you hold off >>>and hope that you can throw away some of the writes because new stuff >>>will home in to overwrite them? >>> >>Yes it is a tradeoff. Having an idle disk gives more weight to "write now". >> > >Not necessarily. What if you are using a solid state disk which only >allows a relatively low number of re-write cycles? What if the disk >is spun down, and spinning it up uses a lot of power? On a laptop, >you don't necessarily want the disk spinning up just to write one >sector. > Yes it does. The factors you mention just add (a lot) more weight to "hold off".
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |