From: "Timothy Miller" <tmiller10@cfl.rr.com>
To: "Nick Piggin" <piggin@cyberone.com.au>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Benefits from computing physical IDE disk geometry?
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 11:25:15 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <000901c301d0$e3223100$6801a8c0@epimetheus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 3E994F06.2000402@cyberone.com.au
From: "Nick Piggin" <piggin@cyberone.com.au>
> The benefit I see is knowing the seek time itself (not geometry), which
> can be used to tune the IO scheduler. This is something that I'll
> probably need to do (in kernel) in order to get my IO scheduler in 2.6,
> as it probably (not tested yet) has bad failure cases on high seek time
> devices like CDROMs.
Well, that IS the heart of the matter, really. Detecting geometry was only
a means to the end of predicting seek time and rotational latency. If you
could magically predict the seek time between any two accesses, then you
could sort your queue optimally. What would be able to do that? A neural
net? :) What would be able to do that without a lot of training time?
Personally, I've been excited about AS, and I would hate to see it not get
in.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-04-13 15:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-04-12 22:46 Benefits from computing physical IDE disk geometry? Timothy Miller
2003-04-12 23:10 ` AW: " Oliver S.
2003-04-13 9:51 ` John Bradford
2003-04-13 11:50 ` Nick Piggin
2003-04-13 15:25 ` Timothy Miller [this message]
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
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-04-13 18:03 Chuck Ebbert
2003-04-13 18:24 ` 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
2003-04-13 22:13 Chuck Ebbert
2003-04-13 23:38 ` Andreas Dilger
2003-04-14 2:29 Chuck Ebbert
2003-04-14 3:44 Chuck Ebbert
2003-04-14 21:27 Chuck Ebbert
2003-04-15 0:03 ` Nick Piggin
2003-04-15 1:19 Chuck Ebbert
2003-04-15 8:28 ` Nick Piggin
2003-04-15 18:33 Chuck Ebbert
2003-04-16 1:16 ` Nick Piggin
2003-04-16 1:59 ` Nick Piggin
2003-04-16 13:28 Chuck Ebbert
2003-04-16 23:06 ` Nick Piggin
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='000901c301d0$e3223100$6801a8c0@epimetheus' \
--to=tmiller10@cfl.rr.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox