linux-kernel - Re: [ANNOUNCE] Ramback: faster than a speeding bullet

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:52:00 -0400
From:	Ric Wheeler <ric@....com>
To:	Daniel Phillips <phillips@...nq.net>
CC:	david@...g.hm, David Newall <davidn@...idnewall.com>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Ramback: faster than a speeding bullet

Daniel Phillips wrote:
> On Sunday 16 March 2008 23:49, david@...g.hm wrote:
>>> Mirroring on the other hand, makes a realtime copy of a volume, that is
>>> never out of date.
>> so just mirror to a local disk array then.
> 
> Great idea.  Except that the disk array has millisecond level latency,
> when what we trying to achieve is microsecond level latency.

Just a point of information, most of the mid-tier and above disk arrays 
can do replication/mirroring behind the scene (i.e., you write to one 
array and it takes care of replicating your write to one or more other 
arrays).  This behind the scene replication can be over various types of 
connections - IP or fibre channel probably are the two most common paths.

That will still leave you with the normal latency for a small write to 
an array which is (when you hit cache) order of 1-2 ms...

ric
--
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/