On Sunday May 21, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Please read > > > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/raid/msg11838.html > > > > and ask if you have further questions. > > > Does this implementation also need to do delayed updates to the stripe > cache? I.e. we bypass the cache and get the requester the data it > needs but then schedule that data to also be copied into the cache by > the work queue. The thinking being to reduce the read penalties > associated with subsequent writes to the stripe. >
I doubt that would be worth the effort. I don't think data lives very long in the stripe cache, and so a lot of the copying would be wasted. Also, I gather that modern drives have a reasonable cache and if data was read recently for a read, then reading it again for a write might be very quick. I think the gains you get on the read side will more than offset any small loss on the write side. NeilBrown - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
