From: Chuck Ebbert <76306.1226@compuserve.com>
To: Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Benefits from computing physical IDE disk geometry?
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 14:03:41 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200304131407_MC3-1-3441-57C7@compuserve.com> (raw)
Nick Piggin wrote:
>>
>> Any good SCSI drive knows the physical geometry of the disk and can
>> therefore optimally schedule reads and writes. Although necessary features,
>> like read queueing, are also available in the current SATA spec, I'm not
>> sure most drives will implement it, at least not very well.
>>
> The "continuous" nature of drive addressing means that the kernel
> can do a fine job seek-wise. Due to write caches and read track
> buffers, rotational scheduling (which could be done if we knew
> geometry) would provide too little gain for the complexity. I would
> say that for most workloads you wouldn't see any difference. (IMO)
OTOH you can come up with scenarios like, say, a DBMS doing 16K page
aligned IO to raw devices where you might see big gains from making sure
those 16K chunks didn't cross a physical cylinder boundary.
--
Chuck
next reply other threads:[~2003-04-13 17:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-04-13 18:03 Chuck Ebbert [this message]
2003-04-13 18:24 ` Benefits from computing physical IDE disk geometry? Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2003-04-13 18:32 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2003-04-13 18:51 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2003-04-13 22:14 ` Alan Cox
2003-04-14 0:17 ` Andreas Dilger
2003-04-13 22:15 ` Alan Cox
2003-04-14 3:58 ` Nick Piggin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-04-16 13:28 Chuck Ebbert
2003-04-16 23:06 ` Nick Piggin
2003-04-15 18:33 Chuck Ebbert
2003-04-16 1:16 ` Nick Piggin
2003-04-16 1:59 ` Nick Piggin
2003-04-15 1:19 Chuck Ebbert
2003-04-15 8:28 ` Nick Piggin
2003-04-14 21:27 Chuck Ebbert
2003-04-15 0:03 ` Nick Piggin
2003-04-14 3:44 Chuck Ebbert
2003-04-14 2:29 Chuck Ebbert
2003-04-13 22:13 Chuck Ebbert
2003-04-13 23:38 ` Andreas Dilger
2003-04-12 22:46 Timothy Miller
2003-04-13 9:51 ` John Bradford
2003-04-13 11:50 ` Nick Piggin
2003-04-13 15:25 ` Timothy Miller
2003-04-14 3:52 ` Nick Piggin
2003-04-14 6:44 ` Mark Hahn
2003-04-14 13:28 ` Nick Piggin
2003-04-13 14:29 ` Alan Cox
2003-04-13 16:15 ` John Bradford
2003-04-18 13:01 ` Helge Hafting
2003-04-18 13:25 ` John Bradford
2003-04-14 18:27 ` Wes Felter
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=200304131407_MC3-1-3441-57C7@compuserve.com \
--to=76306.1226@compuserve.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=piggin@cyberone.com.au \
/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.