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).
next prev parent 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).