From: Ross Vandegrift <ross@willow.seitz.com>
To: Benjamin Scott <bscott@ntisys.com>
Cc: ReiserFS List <reiserfs-list@namesys.com>
Subject: Re: Silly question, defrag
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 00:31:25 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020405053125.GA2724@willow.seitz.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0204041721530.1352-100000@dragon.inside.ntisys.com>
> I think it would seem likely that, once a filesystem does become fragmented,
> performance is going to suck mud.
I'm curious though - shouldn't the elevator read algorithms take care of
this, for the most part? If you wait to do a read until you have a few,
and read sequentially across the disk, you won't be hit with any seeks.
Of course interactive read performance will suffer, but for general
streaming reads why doesn't the elevator offset this?
Ross Vandegrift
ross@willow.seitz.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-04-05 5:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200204030017.12595@X-Message-Flag:>
2002-04-03 8:21 ` Silly question, defrag Joe Cooper
2002-04-03 8:25 ` Hans Reiser
2002-04-03 16:14 ` Matthew Johnson
[not found] ` <200204030808.26186@X-Message-Flag:>
2002-04-03 18:28 ` Hans Reiser
2002-04-03 16:08 ` Matthew Johnson
2002-04-03 18:31 ` Anders Widman
2002-04-03 18:47 ` Yura Umanets
2002-04-03 21:41 ` Anders Widman
[not found] ` <200204030740.05950@X-Message-Flag:>
2002-04-03 18:24 ` Hans Reiser
2002-04-03 19:33 ` matthew johnson
2002-04-04 0:45 ` Tracy R Reed
2002-04-04 1:42 ` rod
2002-04-04 5:19 ` The Amazing Dragon
[not found] ` <20020404161547.GD3990@jensbenecke.de>
2002-04-05 0:04 ` rod
2002-04-07 4:52 ` The Doctor What
2002-04-03 20:30 ` Ross Vandegrift
2002-04-03 20:37 ` Richard Thornton
2002-04-03 20:44 ` Hans Reiser
2002-04-03 23:49 ` Tracy R Reed
2002-04-04 1:58 ` Manuel Krause
2002-04-04 9:16 ` Anders Widman
2002-04-04 18:54 ` Tracy R Reed
2002-04-04 19:09 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2002-04-04 19:20 ` Anders Widman
2002-04-04 22:18 ` Rodd Zurcher
2002-04-04 22:34 ` Benjamin Scott
2002-04-05 5:31 ` Ross Vandegrift [this message]
2002-04-05 6:19 ` Anders Widman
2002-04-05 13:50 ` Benjamin Scott
2002-04-05 15:07 ` Hans Reiser
2002-04-05 8:49 ` Hans Reiser
2002-04-05 13:50 ` Benjamin Scott
2002-04-05 14:04 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2002-04-05 14:20 ` Benjamin Scott
2002-04-05 15:13 ` Hans Reiser
2002-04-05 13:53 ` Stefan Fleiter
2002-04-05 18:56 ` Chris Dukes
2002-04-05 22:33 ` Stefan Fleiter
2002-04-03 8:20 Matthew Johnson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20020405053125.GA2724@willow.seitz.com \
--to=ross@willow.seitz.com \
--cc=bscott@ntisys.com \
--cc=reiserfs-list@namesys.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.