Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 20:21:52 +0100 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> Cc: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: patches for test / review Message-ID: <20102.953580112@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 20 Mar 2000 11:15:45 PST." <20000320111544.A14789@fw.wintelcom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20000320111544.A14789@fw.wintelcom.net>, Alfred Perlstein writes: >Keeping the currect cluster code is a bad idea, if the drivers were >taught how to traverse the linked list in the buf struct rather >than just notice "a big buffer" we could avoid a lot of page >twiddling and also allow for massive IO clustering ( > 64k ) Before we redesign the clustering, I would like to know if we actually have any recent benchmarks which prove that clustering is overall beneficial ? I would think that track-caches and intelligent drives would gain much if not more of what clustering was designed to do gain. I seem to remember Bruce saying that clustering could even hurt ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20102.953580112>