Gentoopower wrote:
Jens Axboe wrote:
On Wed, Mar 01 2006, Gentoopower wrote:
..
I can defintely feel the speed difference between the two drives.
Well that can't be because of NCQ, since it isn't active :-)
Got ya:-)
Who said this box is running only linux?
You did, by posting to the *Linux-IDE* kernel mailing list.
All bets are off for other OSs, especially those that really
*need* NCQ for half-decent performance.
Linux doesn't, but it's definitely nice to wish for.
I've implemented host-queuing support for NCQ and TCQ on
several controllers (for Linux), and it almost always produces
only a tiny *measureable* effect on desktop systems.
Busy servers, with lots of teensy random read requests,
benefit most from it, as do benchmark programs that do a lot of seeking.
But normal system use -- running OO.org, rebuilding kernels,
etc.. no significant measurable difference. Maybe by fiddling
with the IO scheduler code (which defeats NCQ/TCQ to a degree)..
But I'd happily enable it on my own systems anyway!
Cheers
-
: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
