Re: absurdly high "optimal_io_size" on Seagate SAS disk

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

 



> From: Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

> Also, I think it's wrong for filesystems and userspace to use it for 
> alignment.  In E.4 and E.5 in the "sbc3r25.pdf" doc, it looks like they 
> use the optimal granularity field for alignment, not the optimal 
> transfer length.

Everything you say suggests that "optimal transfer length" means
"there is a penalty for doing transfers *larger* than this", but
people have been treating it as "there is a penalty for doing
transfers *smaller* than this".  But the latter is the "optimal
transfer length granularity".

Dale
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]
  Powered by Linux