Messages in this thread | | | From | (Stuart Lynne) | Subject | Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: disk head scheduling | Date | 22 Mar 1999 23:36:47 GMT |
| |
In article <19990322111545.21395@twilight.ucw.cz>, Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@twilight.ucw.cz> wrote: >On Sun, Mar 21, 1999 at 11:15:30PM -0500, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > >Interleaving died fairly soon, and as far as I know was never needed since >that time. > >> In recent years, the emphasis has been upon increasing the storage >> capacity of these Disc drives. The storage capacity, which used >> to be specified in terms of kilobits per square inch, called >> areal density, is now specified in terms of gigabits per linear >> centimeter.
>It's more likely a necessity. Any other interleave would slow the >drive down, which isn't at all what manufacturers wish. They could >just let it spin slower ... > >> Expensive disk drives now do full track buffering. This costs
Exactly. They read and write from a full track buffer. The ordering of the sectors on the physical media can be in a totally random order. The drive electronics simply start reading or writing the appropriate sector to or from the appropriate buffer location when the head is over the start of a sector that needs to be read or written.
-- Stuart Lynne <sl@fireplug.net> 604-461-7532 <http://edge.fireplug.net> PGP Fingerprint: 28 E2 A0 15 99 62 9A 00 88 EC A3 EE 2D 1C 15 68
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |