mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>
To: "Linux-Kernel@Vger. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: Why is NCQ enabled by default by libata? (2.6.20)
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 14:47:20 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <MDEHLPKNGKAHNMBLJOLKKEAICKAC.davids@webmaster.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <460BF73C.5070707@cfl.rr.com>


> But when writing, what is the difference between queuing multiple tagged 
> writes, and sending down multiple untagged cached writes that complete 
> immediately and actually hit the disk later?  Either way the host keeps 
> sending writes to the disk until it's buffers are full, and the disk is 
> constantly trying to commit those buffers to the media in the most 
> optimal order.

Which sounds faster to you:

1) "Do A, B, C, and D."
   "Okay, I've finished A, B, C, and B."
or

2) "Do A."
   "Okay." 
   "Do B."
   "Okay."
   "Do C."
   "Okay."
   "Do D."
   "Okay."

The first looks a bit more efficient to me.

	DS



  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-03-29 21:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-03-27 16:16 linux
2007-03-27 16:25 ` Justin Piszcz
2007-03-27 16:41   ` linux
2007-03-27 16:44     ` Justin Piszcz
2007-03-27 16:58       ` linux
2007-03-27 17:03         ` Justin Piszcz
2007-03-28 14:42   ` Phillip Susi
2007-03-28 14:48     ` Jeff Garzik
2007-03-29 17:28       ` Phillip Susi
2007-03-29 18:40         ` linux
2007-03-29 18:51         ` Jeff Garzik
2007-03-29 21:35         ` Alan Cox
2007-03-29 21:47         ` David Schwartz [this message]
2007-03-30 16:33           ` Lennart Sorensen
     [not found] <fa.NmF2xJwO4BeVbJrFRkf7oV9EYmQ@ifi.uio.no>
     [not found] ` <fa.39luedDWsoqip+QMNtfAv8jvyNg@ifi.uio.no>
     [not found]   ` <fa.b1cZfpMNhZ0teK/UauKLDWw60Jc@ifi.uio.no>
     [not found]     ` <fa.xWaBy6HZTRTgI+PxinV8ajuOlJI@ifi.uio.no>
     [not found]       ` <fa.BiSx71HKysC9QIpS8DLip5BmfxI@ifi.uio.no>
2007-04-01 17:28         ` Robert Hancock
     [not found] <fa.MhN9pBMjZID4rnTNn+fU01uZiss@ifi.uio.no>
2007-03-24 22:11 ` Robert Hancock
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-03-24 16:38 Justin Piszcz
2007-03-24 18:43 ` Alan Cox
2007-03-27  9:55   ` Justin Piszcz
2007-03-27 10:10     ` Tejun Heo
2007-03-27 10:30       ` Justin Piszcz
2007-03-27  5:59 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-03-27 14:26   ` Mark Lord
2007-03-27 18:18   ` Mark Rustad
2007-03-27 18:38     ` Jeff Garzik
2007-03-27 22:12       ` Mark Rustad
2007-03-31 12:55         ` Ric Wheeler

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=MDEHLPKNGKAHNMBLJOLKKEAICKAC.davids@webmaster.com \
    --to=davids@webmaster.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®