On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 15:39, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > While I really substantiate my assumtption, Russel's right, in theory: in > RAID1, you *do* have 2 disks, so reading 2 independent files *should* be > possible without too much seeking. > > But OTOH you might run into disk scheduler issues that way, I really was > thinking about reading one file.
In either case disk scheduler improvements could dramatically increase performance. Improving the performance for the case of a single file without hurting performance for other situations is difficult. Improving performance for reading two files should not be really difficult (as far as kernel coding projects go). > Ok, I should finally learn not to open my mouth too wide where I don't have > the experience, so I guess I'll stay silent in this thread now. No need to do that, just do the tests. Setting up a test-bed for these things should only take a few hours if you have some spare hardware. As I previously noted things MAY have changed since I last tested this area of performance. This is why I never claimed you to be wrong, I just requested benchmark results to support your assertions. I've done the tests of early 2.4.x kernels to show the opposite of what you say, but things could have improved since. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
