From: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>
To: "'Miquel van Smoorenburg'" <miquels@cistron.nl>,
       <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: cfq performance gap
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:20:52 -0800
Message-ID: <000001c71ed2$a90019b0$2e81030a@amr.corp.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Thread-Index: AccenoQNNLFdbxshSYaNFxCdvQHIVAAM8jcA
In-Reply-To: <457fce6a$0$334$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 898
Lines: 17

Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote on Wednesday, December 13, 2006 1:57 AM
> Chen, Kenneth W <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com> wrote:
> >This rawio test plows through sequential I/O and modulo each small record
> >over number of threads.  So each thread appears to be non-contiguous within
> >its own process context, overall request hitting the device are sequential.
> >I can't see how any application does that kind of I/O pattern.
> 
> A NNTP server that has many incoming connections, handled by
> multiple threads, that stores the data in cylic buffers ?

Then whichever the thread that dumps the buffer content to the storage
will do one large contiguous I/O.
-
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/