Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 12 Feb 2002 13:40:09 -0500 (EST) | From | Bill Davidsen <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.4.18-pre9-ac1 |
| |
On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Alan Cox wrote:
> I don't think that should be required actually. The killer on M/O disks > is seek time, and to an extent rotational latency (its 3 trips round a > cheaper M/O disk to rewrite a sector). If anything clustering writes to > the same track should be a big win.
I believe the impetus to the cluster patch is not to address parformance, but because without it a media error on the MO causes a system failure. That seems a good reason to put in the patch, and you can certainly test it with and without, just be sure to sync() before trying the standard code ;-)
-- bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com> CTO, TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.
- 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/
| |