Re: NCQ general question

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

 




On Mar 4, 2006, at 2:10 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:

Steve Byan wrote:

Data integrity -and- performance. Performance increases for all the standard reasons that an asynchronous pipeline increases performance over a synchronous one.

The write cache means that requests on the device can be processed asynchronously, but without NCQ there is still a synchronous bottleneck: the device<->controller pipe.
True, but I think that is fairly small compared to no-write-cache- and- no-queuing case. Write-caching is the major win; optimizing the data transfer is only a second-order effect.

Measurements on NCQ in the field show a distinct performance improvement... 30% has been measured on Linux. Nothing to sneeze at.

Wow! 30% is amazing. I'd be interested in knowing how the costs break down; are these measurements published anywhere?

Regards,
-Steve
--
Steve Byan <smb@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Software Architect
Egenera, Inc.
165 Forest Street
Marlboro, MA 01752
(508) 858-3125


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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux