| To: | Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: The XFS real-time subvolume in Linux |
| From: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 5 Oct 2005 16:24:15 +0200 |
| Cc: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>, Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20051005142006.GA3511@suse.de> |
| References: | <BAY110-F272BEC2E5C429160FB4068B4830@phx.gbl> <200510051618.44230.ak@suse.de> <20051005142006.GA3511@suse.de> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | KMail/1.8.2 |
On Wednesday 05 October 2005 16:20, Jens Axboe wrote: > Indeed, only for the 'obscure' life-or-death type setups will there be a > real difference. Even for those you could in theory do bandwidth allocation on top of the RT classes with some tweaking of the time slices and knowing the worst case transfer rate of the HD, couldn't you? Basically it would be an user space problem. -Andi |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: The XFS real-time subvolume in Linux, Jens Axboe |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: The XFS real-time subvolume in Linux, Jens Axboe |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: The XFS real-time subvolume in Linux, Jens Axboe |
| Next by Thread: | Re: The XFS real-time subvolume in Linux, Jens Axboe |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |