On Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Jens Axboe wrote: > > It's really not that simple, if we go and do easy latency bits, then > throughput drops 30% or more. Well, if we're talking 500-950% improvement vs 30% deprovement, I think it's pretty clear, though. Even the server people do care about latencies. Often they care quite a bit, in fact. And Mike's patch didn't look big or complicated. > You can't say it's black and white latency vs throughput issue, Umm. Almost 1000% vs 30%. Forget latency vs throughput. That's pretty damn black-and-white _regardless_ of what you're measuring. Plus you probably made up the 30% - have you tested the patch? And quite frankly, we get a _lot_ of complaints about latency. A LOT. It's just harder to measure, so people seldom attach numbers to it. But that again means that when people _are_ able to attach numbers to it, we should take those numbers _more_ seriously rather than less. So the 30% you threw out as a number is pretty much worthless. Linus -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
