lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Sep]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: (reiserfs) Re: More on 2.2.18pre2aa2 (summary of elevator ideas)
On 12 Sep 2000, at 18:08, Ed Tomlinson wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I made the comment because I remember back when the discussion was current
> on linux kernel. I thought Jeff Merkey's, message was to the point. Para-
> phrasing from memory, it was something to the effect that novell had
> tried many elevators. All had problems with some loads. The best they
> had found was the 'close the door' idea. I do not remember if the door
> was based on requests or time. Another point to remember is that the
> netware people came up with a what they considered a good solution.

I believe that the Netware elevator is based on outstanding requests.
This is a tunable parameter which may be increased for fast disk
subsystems.

I think that you could consider the number of requests to be loosely
related to time. That is, the time to service 50 requests should be
fairly predictable for a given disk/controller. I don't think you
need to time stamp every request to get good results.


------------------Mailed via Pegasus 3.12 & Mercury 1.44---------------
A.J.Scott@casdn.neu.edu Fax (617)373-2942
Andrew Scott Tel (617)373-5278 _
Northeastern University--138 Meserve Hall / \ /
College of Arts & Sciences-Deans Office / \ \ /
Boston, Ma. 02115 / \_/

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:38    [W:0.052 / U:49.396 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site