Cheers, Andreas On 2012-01-24, at 9:56, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 10:15:04AM -0500, Chris Mason wrote: >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/12/13/326 >> >> This patch is another example, although for a slight different reason. >> I really have no idea yet what the right answer is in a generic sense, >> but you don't need a 512K request to see higher latencies from merging. > > That assumes the 512k requests is created by merging. We have enough > workloads that create large I/O from the get go, and not splitting them > and eventually merging them again would be a big win. E.g. I'm > currently looking at a distributed block device which uses internal 4MB > chunks, and increasing the maximum request size to that dramatically > increases the read performance. > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
