| To: | Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: 4k sector drives |
| From: | Matthias Schniedermeyer <ms@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 23 Jul 2010 16:13:41 +0200 |
| Cc: | Stan Hoeppner <stan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20100723155034.2a42ccd7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <201007211333.48363.eye.of.the.8eholder@xxxxxxxxx> <201007230809.28111@xxxxxx> <20100723095832.GA23174@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <201007231259.11714@xxxxxx> <4C4994CB.2050200@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20100723133843.GA3397@xxxxxxx> <20100723155034.2a42ccd7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) |
On 23.07.2010 15:50, Emmanuel Florac wrote: > Le Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:38:43 +0200 > Matthias Schniedermeyer <ms@xxxxxxx> écrivait: > > > Only for writes, reads are for practically unaffected. > > Sequential writes may be relatively unaffected too; if you write > sequentially a couple of megabytes you'll have only a couple of > additional blocks at the beginning and end of operation. What MAY hurt, also for large writes, are the meta-data operations while writing the file. (e.g. the file-size changes, journaling ...) But i haven't tested that and can't say for sure how much that hurts. Bis denn -- Real Programmers consider "what you see is what you get" to be just as bad a concept in Text Editors as it is in women. No, the Real Programmer wants a "you asked for it, you got it" text editor -- complicated, cryptic, powerful, unforgiving, dangerous. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: 4k sector drives, Emmanuel Florac |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: 4k sector drives, Khelben Blackstaff |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: 4k sector drives, Emmanuel Florac |
| Next by Thread: | Re: 4k sector drives, Christoph Hellwig |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |