[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200701270035.31285.vda.linux@googlemail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2007 00:35:31 +0100
From: Denis Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>
To: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>
Cc: Michael Tokarev <mjt@....msk.ru>, Phillip Susi <psusi@....rr.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>, Viktor <vvp01@...ox.ru>,
Aubrey <aubreylee@...il.com>, Hua Zhong <hzhong@...il.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
hch@...radead.org, kenneth.w.chen@in
Subject: Re: O_DIRECT question
On Friday 26 January 2007 19:23, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Denis Vlasenko wrote:
> > On Thursday 25 January 2007 21:45, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> >> Phillip Susi wrote:
> >>> Denis Vlasenko wrote:
> >>>> You mean "You can use aio_write" ?
> >>> Exactly. You generally don't use O_DIRECT without aio. Combining the
> >>> two is what gives the big win.
> >> Well, it's not only aio. Multithreaded I/O also helps alot -- all this,
> >> say, to utilize a raid array with many spindles.
> >>
> >> But even single-threaded I/O but in large quantities benefits from O_DIRECT
> >> significantly, and I pointed this out before.
> >
> > Which shouldn't be true. There is no fundamental reason why
> > ordinary writes should be slower than O_DIRECT.
> >
> Other than the copy to buffer taking CPU and memory resources.
It is not required by any standard that I know. Kernel can be smarter
and avoid that if it can.
--
vda
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists