Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261418AbUDWUoL (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Apr 2004 16:44:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261419AbUDWUoL (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Apr 2004 16:44:11 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.224.249]:25814 "EHLO main.gmane.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261418AbUDWUoG (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Apr 2004 16:44:06 -0400 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: =?iso-8859-1?q?M=E5ns_Rullg=E5rd?= Subject: Re: File system compression, not at the block layer Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 22:44:30 +0200 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ti211310a080-1832.bb.online.no User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) XEmacs/21.4 (Security Through Obscurity, linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:wwvBdnfDzNlul3ERkwBQkKCxUlg= Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1811 Lines: 37 "Richard B. Johnson" writes: > On Fri, 23 Apr 2004, Joel Jaeggli wrote: > >> On Fri, 23 Apr 2004, Paul Jackson wrote: >> >> > > SO... in addition to the brilliance of AS, is there anything else that >> > > can be done (using compression or something else) which could aid in >> > > reducing seek time? >> > >> > Buy more disks and only use a small portion of each for all but the >> > most infrequently accessed data. >> >> faster drives. The biggest disks at this point are far slower that the >> fastest... the average read service time on a maxtor atlas 15k is like >> 5.7ms on 250GB western digital sata, 14.1ms, so that more than twice as >> many reads can be executed on the fastest disks you can buy now... of >> course then you pay for it in cost, heat, density, and controller costs. >> everthing is a tradeoff though. >> > > If you want to have fast disks, then you should do what I > suggested to Digital 20 years ago when they had ST-506 > interfaces and SCSI was available only from third-parties. > It was called "striping" (I'm serious!). Not the so-called > RAID crap that took the original idea and destroyed it. > If you have 32-bits, you design an interface board for 32 > disks. The interface board strips each bit to the data that > each disk gets. That makes the whole array 32 times faster > than a single drive and, of course, 32 times larger. For best performance, the spindles should be synchronized too. This might be tricky with disks not intended for such operation, of course. -- M?ns Rullg?rd mru@kth.se - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/