Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 12 Sep 2000 15:46:19 +0200 (CEST) | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: More on 2.2.18pre2aa2 |
| |
On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Rik van Riel wrote:
>Uhmmm, isn't the elevator about request /latency/ ?
Yes, but definitely not absolute "time" latency.
How do you get a 1msec latency for a read request out of a blockdevice that writes 1 request in 2 seconds? See?
That was one of the first issues I was thinking about when I started playing with the elevator. (and yes, some of my early patches was setting a per-request timestamp using jiffies)
Note: I understand you can do in function of time something that works ok for a normal 10/20Mbyte/sec harddisk, but since the elevator is used every time you write to any blockdevice out there, you also have to take into account things like ZIP drives and whatever other slow device that does less than 1Mbyte/sec I/O or even slower (as well as faster devices). A zip drive is slow writing, but that doesn't mean it isn't even slower while seeking.
Andrea
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |