linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ric Wheeler <ric@emc.com>
To: Konstantin Olchanski <olchansk@sam.triumf.ca>
Cc: Mark Hahn <hahn@physics.mcmaster.ca>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@gmail.com>,
	linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Accelerating Linux software raid
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 08:00:54 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <43241C76.4030900@emc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050911023518.GD10501@sam.triumf.ca>

Konstantin Olchanski wrote:

>I am now confused. Is somebody trying to save power by adding an i/o
>coprocessor? (with it's own power overhead for memory, i/o, etc)
>
>To me it is simple:
>
>1) If you have an infinite power budget (big box), you might as well
>   let the main cpus do the raid stuff. If you are short on power (embedded),
>   you cannot afford to power an extra processor (+memory and stuff).
>
>2) If you have rich customers (big box), let them pay for a bigger
>   main cpu to do the raid, if you want to be cheap (embedded, appliance),
>   you cannot afford to plop an extra cpu (+support chips) on your custom pcb.
>  
>
The actual facts don't support this view since the gap in power 
consumption is huge. Most of these system on a chip designs provide the 
main CPU/northbridge/southbridge and extra execution units for a small 
fraction of one standard CPU.  Say under 20  watts for all of the above 
versus up to (over sometimes) 100 watts for a standard CPU (without its 
system chip sets).



  reply	other threads:[~2005-09-11 12:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-09-06 18:24 Accelerating Linux software raid Dan Williams
2005-09-06 21:52 ` Molle Bestefich
2005-09-10  4:51 ` Mark Hahn
2005-09-10 12:58   ` Ric Wheeler
2005-09-10 15:35     ` Mark Hahn
2005-09-10 19:13       ` Dan Williams
2005-09-11  2:06       ` Ric Wheeler
2005-09-11  2:35         ` Konstantin Olchanski
2005-09-11 12:00           ` Ric Wheeler [this message]
2005-09-11 20:19             ` Mark Hahn
2005-09-10  8:35 ` Colonel Hell
2005-09-11 23:14 ` Neil Brown

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=43241C76.4030900@emc.com \
    --to=ric@emc.com \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@gmail.com \
    --cc=hahn@physics.mcmaster.ca \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=olchansk@sam.triumf.ca \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).