On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 12:56:55AM -0700, John R Pierce wrote:
> przemolicc@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > The above numbers are true if we have random (!) IO pattern.
> > In case of sequential (!) IO even SATA disks can deliver much, much higher numbers.
> >
>
>
> sequential IO is remarkably rare in a typical server environment
Yes, of course: Oracle's redo logs which are key performance factor for all
transactions (inserts/updates) have sequential IO pattern.
And Oracle is not a typical server environment ....
> anyways, the IOPS numbers on sequential operations aren't much higher,
> they are just transferring more data per operation.
I didn't say that they _are_ much higher. I said that even SATA
disks can deliver hight IOPS on condition of sequential IO.
Regards
Przemyslaw Bak (przemol)
--
http://przemol.blogspot.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Audi kilka tysiÄ?cy zĹ?otych taniej? Przebieraj wĹ?rĂłd tysiÄ?cy ogĹ?oszeĹ?!
Sprawdz >>> http://linkint.pl/f26b3
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
