On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 09:09:47PM +0100, Peter Grandi wrote: > >>> Where do you get the assumption from that FhGFS/BeeGFS is > >>> going to do random reads/writes or the application of top of > >>> it is going to do that? > > >> In this specific case it is not an assumption, thanks to the > >> prominent fact that the original poster was testing (locally I > >> guess) and complaining about concurrent read/writes, which > >> result in random like arm movement even if each of the read and > >> write streams are entirely sequential. > > [ ... ] > > > Low speed and high latencies are not sufficient information to > > speculate about the cause. > > It is pleasing that you seem to know at least that by themselves > «Low speed and high latencies» are indeed not sufficient. > > But in «the specific case» what is sufficient to make a good guess > is what I wrote, which you seem to have been unable to notice or > understand. Peter, I really don't care if you are right or wrong, your response is entirely inappropriate for this forum. Wheaton's Law: "Don't Be a Dick." Bernd is entitled to point out how tenuous your thread of logic is - if he didn't I was going to say exactly the same thing - it is based entirely on a house of assumptions you haven't actually verified. An appropriate response would be to ask the OP to describe their workload and storage in more detail so you can verify which of your asumptions were correct and which weren't, and take the discussion from there. But instead of taking the evidence-based verification path, you've resorted to personal attacks to defend your tenuous logic. That is out of line and not acceptible behaviour. Knowledge is not a cudgel to beat people down with. Nobody really cares how much you know, nor do they need you to try to prove you know more than they do. If you succeed in proving how much of an Expert(tm) you are, then the only thing that people will remember about you is "what a dick that guy is". Unfortunately, Peter, you've made a habit of this behaviour. Every discussion thread you enter ends up with you abusing someone because they dared to either question your assertions or didn't understand what you said precisely. Indeed, I've come to assosicate your name with such behaviour over the past couple of years, to the point where I see your name in a thread and I wonder what will trigger you to abuse someone before I've even read the email. With this email, you've finally reached my Intolerable Dickhead On The Internet Threshold. Given that this is on the XFS mailing list, and I'm the XFS Maintainer it falls to me to draw a line in the sand: such behaviour is not acceptible in this forum. In future, Peter, please do not post to the list if you can't be nice or stay on topic. We don't need you to "help" by abusing people; we get along and solve problems just fine without you. Hence if you can't play nicely with others then please go away and don't come back. -Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
