Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755928AbZAOPHb (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jan 2009 10:07:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752978AbZAOPHU (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jan 2009 10:07:20 -0500 Received: from mail-qy0-f11.google.com ([209.85.221.11]:62976 "EHLO mail-qy0-f11.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751733AbZAOPHS (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jan 2009 10:07:18 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=XJcQ9wetf+4+mO6O7DDiXFdtMTwbT0SDhLHYxB/TLDgGLCp/f+HgBOWlLKAQ5bJE05 nY9Kn+R7+e2wD89O2C8wc6+sBOr6N1MsdKMPrFzZurT8zVs9pI8ZXC3hCX2saFZErV72 KHJam+uwVXU8T/zgeWc0URyYxwux+yGFQQZmQ= Message-ID: <87f94c370901150707h10506e99reaa40c23e32ab18c@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 10:07:16 -0500 From: "Greg Freemyer" To: "Tejun Heo" Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: export SSD/non-rotational queue flag through sysfs Cc: "James Bottomley" , "Michael Tokarev" , "Jens Axboe" , "Kay Sievers" , "Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, "Alan Cox" In-Reply-To: <496ECBA0.60209@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200901051952.58029.bzolnier@gmail.com> <20090105185428.GS32491@kernel.dk> <20090106073515.GY32491@kernel.dk> <4964866D.8010503@msgid.tls.msk.ru> <1231342473.3282.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <496ECBA0.60209@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2233 Lines: 58 On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > James Bottomley wrote: >> I'm afraid that's pretty much marketing coolaid. Rotational storage >> will dominate for the forseeable future: just do a simple back of the >> envelope calculation: > > Or just compare prices per byte of memory, flash and rotation disk. > They haven't had changed too much during last several years. > Secondary storage which is only slightly cheaper than the primary > storage doesn't have much chance of flying high and far. > > Thanks. > > -- > tejun Have you seen the new pricing Samsung has announced for their 3rd generation SSD. It is about 1/3 of the Intel' SSD price if I recall correctly and the performance is approaching Intel's from what I've seen. I've been talking to the OpenHSM (Hierachical Storage Manager) team about their project. They are working on getting the logic in place now to move data blocks from one class of storage to another while leaving the filesystem itself un-affected from the users perspective. http://code.google.com/p/fscops/ They have a very long way to go with their code/project, but it is conceptually similar to the ext4_defrag patch that already exists. The big difference is the data block allocation algorithm will have to be totally different. If and when that get their code done, I would love to have 500 GB of SSD teamed with several TB of rotational HDD and have the HSM move my files between fast SSD and slow rotational. I typically know which datasets I will be working with heavily, so even a simple user space tool that would let me adjust which tier of storage my files were sitting on would suffice. Greg -- Greg Freemyer Litigation Triage Solutions Specialist http://www.linkedin.com/in/gregfreemyer First 99 Days Litigation White Paper - http://www.norcrossgroup.com/forms/whitepapers/99%20Days%20whitepaper.pdf The Norcross Group The Intersection of Evidence & Technology http://www.norcrossgroup.com -- 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/