[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0803122327260.3786@asgard.lang.hm>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:32:52 -0700 (PDT)
From: david@...g.hm
To: Daniel Phillips <phillips@...nq.net>
cc: David Newall <davidn@...idnewall.com>,
Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Ramback: faster than a speeding bullet
On Wed, 12 Mar 2008, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 March 2008 22:45, David Newall wrote:
>
>> Your idea seems predicated on throwing large amounts of RAM at the
>> problem. What I want to know is this: Is it really 25 times faster than
>> ext3 with an equally huge buffer cache?
>
> Yes.
this I don't understand. what makes your approach 25x faster?
looking at the comparison of a 500G filesystem with 500G of ram allocated
for a buffer cache.
yes, initially it will be a bit slower (until the files get into the
buffer cache), and if fsync is disabled all writes will go to the buffer
cache (until writeout hits)
I may be able to see room for a few percent difference, but not 2x, let
alone 25x.
David Lang
--
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