[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <4810ACEA.5070401@sun.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 11:53:14 -0400
From: David Collier-Brown <davecb@....com>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"Alan D. Brunelle" <Alan.Brunelle@...com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] Skip I/O merges when disabled
Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 24 2008, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
>>>Not a good idea IMHO, it's much better with an explicit setting. That
>>>way you don't introduce indeterministic behavior.
>>
>>So you would be deterministically slower.
>
>
> Yes, absolutely. Think about the case for a second - the potential gain is in
> fractions of a percent basically, the potential loss however is HUGE.
> There's absolutely no way on earth I'd ever make this dynamic.
If this is intended for databases, it might be backwards (;-))
The commercial unix "forcedirectio" option that Oracle and other
database vendors usually ask for turns out to be a benefit
in large sequential data transfers, because it does two things:
1) transfers directly between user address space and disk, avoiding buffering, and
2) allows enthusiastic coalescence of synchronous writes
Is this intended for DBMSs, or for something esle?
--dave
--
David Collier-Brown | Always do right. This will gratify
Sun Microsystems, Toronto | some people and astonish the rest
davecb@....com | -- Mark Twain
(905) 943-1983, cell: (647) 833-9377, (800) 555-9786 x56583
bridge: (877) 385-4099 code: 506 9191#
--
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