Quoting Scott Long <scottl_at_samsco.org> (from Sat, 20 Mar 2010 12:17:33 -0600): > code was actually taking advantage of the larger I/O's. The > improvement really > depends on the workload, of course, and I wouldn't expect it to be noticeable > for most people unless they're running something like a media server. I don't think this is limited to media servers, think about situations where you process a large amount of data seuqntially... (seuqntial access case in a big data-warehouse scenario or a 3D render farm which get's the huge amount of data from a shared resource ("how many render-clients can I support at the same time with my disk infrastructure"-scenario) or some of the bigtable/nosql stuff which seems to be more and more popular at some sites). There are enough situations where sequential file access is the key performance metric so that I wouldn't say that only media servers depend upon large sequential I/O's. Bye, Alexander. -- That's life. What's life? A magazine. How much does it cost? Two-fifty. I only have a dollar. That's life. http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander _at_ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild _at_ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137Received on Mon Mar 22 2010 - 11:49:40 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:02 UTC