From: Lincoln Dale Subject: Re: [PATCH] direct-IO API change Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2002 19:49:29 +1000 Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20021005194507.031018c0@mira-sjcm-3.cisco.com> References: <3D9E1847.F6DDA3AE@digeo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: Andrew Morton , Chuck Lever , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux NFS List Return-path: Received: from sj-msg-core-3.cisco.com ([171.70.157.152]) by usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 17xlbB-00016B-00 for ; Sat, 05 Oct 2002 02:51:49 -0700 To: Linus Torvalds In-Reply-To: Errors-To: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: At 04:23 PM 4/10/2002 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >Especially since I thought that O_DIRECT on the regular file (or block >device) performed about as well as raw does anyway these days? Or is that >just one of my LSD-induced flashbacks? from my multiple 64/66 PCI bus + multiple 2gbit/s FC HBA tests, yes, they're around the same. (now up to 390mbyte/sec throughput on latest & greatest x86 hardware i have; front-side-bus no longer the limiting factor, but dual 64/66 PCI). of course, purely synthetic tests designed to stress Fibre Channel switching infrastructure, not real-world disk i/o.. cheers, lincoln. ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs