Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 13:14:45 -0800 (PST) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> To: wilko@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: dillon@apollo.backplane.com (Matthew Dillon), phk@critter.freebsd.dk (Poul-Henning Kamp), bright@wintelcom.net (Alfred Perlstein), current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: patches for test / review Message-ID: <200003212114.NAA49370@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> In-Reply-To: <20000321200438.F966@yedi.iaf.nl> from Wilko Bulte at "Mar 21, 2000 08:04:38 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2000 at 09:29:56AM -0800, Matthew Dillon wrote: > > :> > > :> I would think that track-caches and intelligent drives would gain > > :> much if not more of what clustering was designed to do gain. > > : > > :Hm. But I'd think that even with modern drives a smaller number of bigger > > :I/Os is preferable over lots of very small I/Os. Or have I missed the point? > > > As long as you do not blow away the drive's cache with your big I/O's, > > and as long as you actually use all the returned data, it's definitely > > more efficient to issue larger I/O's. > > Prefetching data that is never used is obviously a waste. 256K might be a > bit big, I was thinking of something like 64-128Kb > > Drive caches tend to be 0.5-1Mbyte (on SCSI disks) for modern drives. Your a bit behind the times with that set of numbers for modern SCSI drives. It is now 1 to 16 Mbyte of cache, with 2 and 4Mbyte being the most common. -- Rod Grimes - KD7CAX @ CN85sl - (RWG25) rgrimes@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net 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?200003212114.NAA49370>