Re: Why is NCQ enabled by default by libata? (2.6.20)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Phillip Susi wrote:
Jeff Garzik wrote:
NCQ provides for a more asynchronous flow. It helps greatly with reads (of which most are, by nature, synchronous at the app level) from multiple threads or apps. It helps with writes, even with write cache on, by allowing multiple commands to be submitted and/or retired at the same time.

But when writing, what is the difference between queuing multiple tagged writes, and sending down multiple untagged cached writes that complete immediately and actually hit the disk later? Either way the host keeps sending writes to the disk until it's buffers are full, and the disk is constantly trying to commit those buffers to the media in the most optimal order.

Less overhead to starting commands, and all the other benefits of making operations fully async.

	Jeff



-
To unsubscribe from this list: 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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux RAID]     [Git]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Newbie]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux