Messages in this thread |  | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] SATA NCQ support | | From | Greg Stark <> | | Date | 29 May 2005 23:41:31 -0400 |
| |
Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de> writes:
> SATA is still pretty fast without NCQ, ... > People have lived happily without NCQ support in SATA for years, I'm > sure you could too :-)
It kind of depends on your application. For applications that require write caching disabled like Postgres et al I suspect NCQ will make a *much* bigger difference. I would be interested to see those benchmarks people were posting earlier claiming 30-40% difference retested with write caching disabled. I suspect disabling write caching will demolish the non-NCQ performance but have a much smaller effect on NCQ-enabled performance.
Currently Postgres strongly recommends SCSI drives and the belief is that it's the tagged command queuing that allows SCSI drives to perform well without resorting to data integrity destroying write caching.
-- greg
- 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/
|  |