From: "Timothy Miller" <tmiller10@cfl.rr.com>
To: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Benefits from computing physical IDE disk geometry?
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 18:46:36 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <001301c30145$5ff85fb0$6801a8c0@epimetheus> (raw)
I'm excited about the new I/O scheduler (proposed?) in the 2.5.x kernel, but
I have to admit to a considerable amount of ignorance of its actual
behavior. Thus, if it already does what I'm talking about, please feel free
to ignore this post. :)
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.
So, what if one were to write a program which would perform a bunch of
seek-time tests to estimate an IDE disk's physical geometry? It could then
make that information available to the kernel to use to reorder accesses
more optimally. Additionally, discrepancies from expected seek times could
be logged in the kernel and used to further improve efficiency over time.
If it were good enough, many of the advantages of using SCSI disks would
become less significant.
Ideas?
next reply other threads:[~2003-04-12 22:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-04-12 22:46 Timothy Miller [this message]
2003-04-12 23:10 ` AW: Benefits from computing physical IDE disk geometry? Oliver S.
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
-- 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='001301c30145$5ff85fb0$6801a8c0@epimetheus' \
--to=tmiller10@cfl.rr.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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