lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Sep]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: efficient access to "rotational"; new fcntl?
On 09/19/2009 12:19 PM, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>> However, sort *would* benefit, and some UCLA students implemented that
>> for a term project. Unfortunately, the project is stalled because the
>> implementation was not efficient enough, and no one has found the
>> time to improve it since.
>>
> parallel sort... call me skeptical. My gut feeling is that you'll get
> killed by communication overhead.
> (sort seems to be more communication than raw cpu use)
>
>

Why? a sort that fits in memory is purely cpu and memory access.

Instead of O(N log N) you'd get K * O(N/K log N/K) followed by an O(N)
merge. For large N and small K, you get a speedup of roughly K (since
the O(N) merge is dominated by the preceding sort.


--
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-09-19 13:15    [W:0.065 / U:0.456 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site