On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 16:19 -0400, Mark Lord wrote: > James Bottomley wrote: > > On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 14:21 -0400, Greg Freemyer wrote: > >> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 1:19 PM, James Bottomley<James.Bottomley@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 13:08 -0400, Greg Freemyer wrote: > .. > >>>> Non-coalescing is believed detrimental, > >>> It is? Why? > >> For the only compliant SSD in the wild, Mark has shown it to be true > >> via testing. > > > > He only said larger trims take longer. As I said previously, if it's a > > X+nY relationship, then we still benefit from accumulation up to some > > value of n. > .. > > Err, what I said was, "rm -rf /usr/src/linux" takes over half an hour > with uncoalesced TRIM, and only a scant few seconds in total *with* > coalesced TRIM. Yes, sorry, missed the Non- when I read that sentence. James -- 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
